My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN112092
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
CCMIN112092
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:02 AM
Creation date
10/28/1999 11:28:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
145 <br /> <br />measures for this community. Option 3 has received no support from <br />the Association. Mr. Snyder explained that the petition has been <br />drafted and people are ready to move forward with a referendum. <br />This is not something that the people want to do but it is <br />something that they will do if need be. He did not believe that <br />there would be a referendum if Council approved one of the first <br />two options that he proposed. <br /> <br /> Frank Berlogar, 2200 Vineyard Avenue, explained that if the <br />second access road was developed, his property would be the <br />recipient of the alignment. He has spoken with Mr. Fairfield about <br />this problem and he was sure that they could come to terms with the <br />construction haul road that is a condition of approval for this <br /> <br /> Rip Benson, 1128 Hearst Drive, also represented the Kottinger <br />Ranch Homeowners Association. He previously spoke with a Planning <br />Commissioner who claimed that if the Commission had to do it over <br />again, it would have asked for a delay to research the information <br />and a better understanding of the community concerns. The <br />Association is not opposed to the 98 homes to be built, but is <br />opposed to a golf course because of the traffic created by it. He <br />reiterated that they are ready to move forward with a referendum, <br />although they would rather not do so. <br /> <br /> Ken Chrisman, 1944 Vineyard Avenue, spoke in opposition to the <br />second access road. <br /> <br /> Mr. Snyder added that he spoke with the Assistant City <br />Attorney and was told that each petition for the referendum would <br />need to have the exhibits to the ordinance attached to it. He <br />asked if Council would allow them to eliminate Exhibits A, B, and <br />C because of the volume of paper. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer asked if Council changed the approval to 86 <br />units, would it then be the first reading of the ordinance and the <br />second reading would be at the following City Council meeting. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush answered yes. <br /> <br /> Ted Fairfield, representing the applicant, explained that this <br />project was formally submitted to City Council over a year ago and <br />has gone through the entire public hearing process. He did not <br />believe that any more could be accomplished by delaying this <br />process. The EIR was very elaborate. The Planning Commission <br />approved this project (5-0 vote) with 98 lots with no requirement <br />for a secondary access road. He explained the process the project <br />has since gone through. He believed that this project provides a <br />first-class golf course and a lot of public open space. <br />He asked for a positive answer this evening. <br /> <br />10/20/92 15 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.