My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN051689
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
CCMIN051689
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:51:41 AM
Creation date
11/3/1999 10:52:21 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
143 <br /> <br /> Councilmember Mohr asked that if this were the case, would <br /> these costs be reimbursed to the developer as other properties <br /> develop. Mr. Swift stated that staff would recommend that. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Brandes stated he could not vote in favor of <br /> the Negative Declaration because he felt there are several items <br /> which need further environmental review: additional traffic; <br /> growth inducement; and impact on City services. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Tarver stated he voted in opposition to the <br /> Negative Declaration at the last hearing because of growth <br /> inducing reasons but now believes the realighment will make no <br /> difference on growth. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer stated he felt the problem will be with the old <br /> land fill site and will take years to correct; it could be a real <br /> hazard. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilmember Butler, and seconded by <br /> Councilmember Mohr, that Resolution No. 89-224 be adopted, based <br /> on a review of an initial environmental study done for this <br /> project, and on a finding that no significant environmental impact <br /> would occur as outlined in the City's guidelines and on a further <br /> finding that a negative declaration is appropriate in connection <br /> with GP-89-1, application of the City of Pleasanton to amend the <br /> Circulation Element of the General Plan by realigning Vineyard <br /> Avenue at its intersection with Clara Lane to a straighter <br /> configuration. <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Tarver, and Mayor Mercer <br />NOES: Councilmember Brandes <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> Councilmember Mohr stated that with respect to the potential <br />for increased traffic, if East Bay Regional Park is going to <br />develop that will invite a considerable amount of traffic from <br />outside the City, and the City should make the street as safe as <br />possible. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Brandes stated he concurs with Mrs. Storch that <br />straightening out the road is not appropriate and will make it <br />more dangerous. He felt it is premature to make a decision at <br />this time; he does not want to encourage development east of the <br />City. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Tarver stated he concurs with Councilmember <br />Brandes. He does not think one configuration is safer than <br />another alignment, and he likes the General Plan alignment. He <br />did feel the "S" curve needs to be straightened out. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer stated the intersection where Old Vineyard <br />Avenue intersects with New Vineyard Avenue would be a logical <br />place for a stop light. <br /> <br /> - 8 - 5-16-89 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.