Laserfiche WebLink
218 <br /> <br /> Mr. Frank Dunbar, Principal of Cardoza-DiLallo Harrington, <br /> Landscape Architects, 450 Main Street, indicated his support for <br /> the Ruby Hill Project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Frank Brandes, 6889 Corte Sonada, stated that the Council <br /> has the opportunity at this time to start the process for a <br /> development that will have a significant and long-term impact on <br /> the community. He pointed out that the concerns expressed by <br /> Councils regarding the Project have been met and exceeded, <br /> indicating that the developers want to be an active part of <br /> Pleasanton, be responsible citizens, and add to the betterment of <br /> the community. <br /> <br /> Mr. John Innes, 1586 Foothill Road, stated that Friends of the <br /> Vineyard endorses the Ruby Hill Project as a major cornerstone in <br /> turning the economics of viticulture and preserving open space in <br /> the Tri-Valley area. He noted that the Project addresses the <br /> concerns of interested parties and more than exceeds the City's <br /> requirements for annexation; however, the developer should look <br /> into the water needs of the project's agricultural land. He <br /> indicated that this would be an opportune time for the City to <br /> undertake a major study with respect to the feasibility of a <br /> "Reverse Osmosis" (RO) plant in the area. He pointed out that the <br /> 850 homes on the site would generate enough reconditioned effluent <br /> from the RO plant to supply the water for 550 acres of agricultural <br /> land. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver inquired if there were any disagreements among the <br /> members of Friends of the Vineyard with respect to the Board of <br /> Supervisors' decision on the Ruby Hill Project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Innes replied that a minority position of about 100 out of <br /> the 1,700 members has questioned how Friends of the Vineyard, which <br /> has opposed development on the land a few years back, can now <br /> endorse development on that same land. He explained that what the <br /> group opposed then was the five-acre ranch proposed by Southern <br /> Pacific and Computer Land, whereas Ruby Hill is a planned community <br /> with 500 acres of viable viticulture. <br /> <br /> Mr. Phil Wente, representing the Wente family, 5565 Tesla Road <br /> in Livermore, endorsed the comments made by Mr. McKeehan and <br /> Mr. Innes regarding the viticulture aspects of the Project. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked Mr. Wente how many acres within the Valley he <br /> currently has that are planted to grapes. <br /> <br /> - 8 - <br /> 6-4-91 <br /> <br /> <br />