Laserfiche WebLink
195 <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes clarified that before bringing the project back <br />as a PUD, the McDowells are requesting that the condition of <br />approval regarding the Vineyard Avenue realignment be removed. <br /> <br /> Mr. MacDonald said yes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes concurred with Mr. Mercer's comments. He added <br />that he did not think it was vital that the realignment take place <br />before the project began because the project does not have that <br />much bearing on the realignment. He stated, however, that the <br />project should be considered as a separate issue, and if the <br />Vineyard Avenue realignment is ever developed, the McDowells <br />should pay their fair share. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer asked Mr. MacDonald if the McDowells would pay for <br />the whole road if they get project approval and no other <br />development is allowed in the area. <br /> <br /> Mr. MacDonald replied that the traffic study states that <br />Vineyard Avenue is at Level Service A and an additional nine units <br />would not push it beyond that. He commented that "fair share" <br />would be an ideal phrase for the condition and that after the <br />Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is done, all those responsible <br />for creating the impact on Vineyard Avenue, including Ruby Hills <br />and CalTrans, when it does Highway 84, should be required to pay <br />their fair share. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes asked Mr. Roush if the project could still <br />proceed as a PUD if no action were taken at this time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush replied that Council could decide that a PUD would <br />be an appropriate request. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes proposed that staff continue to contact property <br />owners along Vineyard Avenue regarding their interest in annexing <br />into the City, as earlier recommended. With regard to the <br />McDowell property, he stated that the Victorian Vineyard Project <br />should be able to proceed prior to the completion of the Vineyard <br />Avenue realignment and that the condition of approval could be <br />changed to say that the McDowells will participate in the cost of <br />realignment when it does occur, the amount of which will be <br />determined by the City. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer added that the McDowells can bring back the <br />project as a PUD. <br /> <br />Item 8b <br />Request for Stop Signs on West Las Positas Boulevard at <br />Dorman Road <br /> <br /> Mr. Elliott presented his report (SR 90:155) regarding the <br />matter. <br /> <br /> - 9 - <br /> 4-17-90 <br /> <br /> <br />