My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN091989
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
CCMIN091989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:51:41 AM
Creation date
11/3/1999 10:30:40 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.
/
21
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
347 <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer mentioned that with regard to the stop work order, <br />it was his understanding that the judge indicated that any stop <br />work order issued by the City could be contested within five days, <br />and the judge would decide if the stop work order was legitimate <br />or not. The stop work order cannot be enforced before that <br />decision is made. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush pointed out that this applies only to the issue of <br />access to the subdivision through Crellin Road; it does not apply <br />to the other conditions of approval. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes stated that homebuyers should be informed about, <br />and given a copy of, the project's conditions of approval that may <br />affect them. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush indicated that two of the conditions for this <br />project were that no occupancy of the units would be allowed until <br />the City accepted the entire subdivision, and that the developers <br />were to provide all buyers with a copy of the project's conditions <br />of approval. These were also attached to the CC&Rs before <br />recording. He added that he was not aware if these conditions <br />were met or not. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer commented that enough attention has been brought <br />to the project's contractors and workers and that he agreed with <br />the City Attorney's suggestion to leave the situation as it is and <br />see if the problem gets worse again. He mentioned that he had <br />visited the site several times after 4:30 p.m. and had seen <br />workers drinking beer. He expressed concern about the possibility <br />of the workers' being intoxicated as they drive their trucks down <br />the hill. This situation could bring about more complaints from <br />the residents, and the City would have another problem to <br />address. <br /> <br /> Mr. Eastman stated that his department worked on the area <br />before and after the last Council meeting, based on public <br />complaints. On September 6th, they wrote out 60 citations in nine <br />man-hours in the Vintage Hills area and kept tab of where the <br />citations went: 40 to residents of the area, 20 to non-residents. <br />He added that the beer situation has been addressed mostly in the <br />shopping centers; he would look into the outlying areas. <br /> <br /> Mr. Richard King, 3237 Touriga Drive, mentioned that speeding <br />cars do not stop at the Touriga Drive and Tawny Drive stop sign <br />and requested that a police officer be stationed there at around <br />7:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to enforce traffic rules. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mary Pat Hawkins commented that there are many people <br />speeding through Montevino Drive, and no traffic enforcement is <br />being done there. She also mentioned that when she purchased her <br />house, she did not receive any notice on the conditions of <br />approval from either the broker or the builder; nothing was <br />mentioned in the CC&Rs or the escrow papers about the possibility <br />of not having complete access. <br /> <br /> -6- <br /> <br /> 9-19-89 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.