My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN120192
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
CCMIN120192
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:02 AM
Creation date
10/28/1999 11:34:01 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.
/
24
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
211 <br /> <br />was not happy about comments regarding notice to her of the PG&E <br />poles and fencing prior to their approval and statements that she <br />had no objection. She said that she would be appealing any and all <br />modifications made to date by Mr. Joel. Ms. Sorenson was not happy <br />with the fact that Mr. Joel is able to have PG&E poles erected <br />before requesting such modification and on the same day is able to <br />get approval after the fact. He was specifically instructed to get <br />approval from Council before any modifications were made. She <br />indicated that if the fencing completely surrounds the system, <br />there is no way for the wildlife to get access to the water, which <br />is one of the conditions. She agreed with the recommendation by <br />staff of an agreement being reached if use is to be promoted by Mr. <br />Joel. She requested that the monitoring device be tamper-proof and <br />that Mr. Joel not be the one to be responsible to ensure <br />compliance. She believed the City should be responsible for <br />monitoring the device. She agreed with the staff recommendation <br />that if an agreement cannot be reached that the diversion equipment <br />should be dismantled. She did not want the staff conditions to be <br />changed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked what needed to be changed in the agreement in <br />order for Ms. Sorensen to sign it. <br /> <br /> Ms. Sorensen stated that there were not too many changes that <br />needed to be made to the agreement. She wanted to be indemnified <br />from any actions of Mr. Joel. She did not want the agreement to <br />terminate until she was able to receive City water pursuant to her <br />agreement with A-M Homes. She further explained that the <br />agreement, as is stands, requires her to use her springbox. It is <br />almost dry due to the diversions of Mr. Joel and if she can't use <br />it, she would be in breach of the agreement. Ms. Sorensen was <br />willing to work with Mr. Joel. <br /> <br /> David Glenn, 5650 Foothill Road, spoke on behalf of the <br />Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee. He explained his concern with <br />the wildlife within the area of the lot line adjustment and the <br />spring. He then referred to the April 21, 1992 City Council <br />meeting and read excerpts from the minutes and staff report. He <br />also read excerpts from the current staff report. Mr. Glenn <br />believed that Mr. Joel was violating the conditions set by the <br />City. <br /> <br /> He added that Mr. Joel was not considering the natural habitat <br />and wildlife and was not showing any respect for his neighbors or <br />the City. He recommended that Council take this matter very <br />seriously because water is a concern to everybody. <br /> <br /> Mannie Joel, 5470 Foothill Road, stated the assumption that <br />the connection between his spring and Ms. Sorensen's water supply <br />has never been proven. He disagreed with this assumption. This <br />spring is one of three springs that has been used for many years by <br />the Garms Ranch at the same time Ms. Sorensen was using her water <br /> <br />12/1/92 9 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.