My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN070787
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1987
>
CCMIN070787
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:50:59 AM
Creation date
11/4/1999 11:16:21 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.
/
17
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
AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br /> <br />Councilmembers Mohr, Wilson, and Mayor Mercer <br />Councilmember Brandes <br />Councilmember Butler <br /> <br />MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCILMEMBERS <br />Proposed Expansion of Federal Correction Institute <br /> Mr. Walker advised that the Environmental Impact Report for this proposed <br />project has not been received, and that it will probably be several weeks be- <br />fore it is available for review. Mayor Mercer instructed staff to place this <br />item back on the agenda after Council has reviewed the EIR for the proposed <br />expansion of the Federal Correctional Institute. <br /> <br />Consideration of Sherwood Recreational Park Proposal <br /> Councilmember Brandes stated that as liaison to the East Bay Regional Park <br />District he felt Council should comment on the environmental impact report. <br />Mr. Swift advised that the City and County of San Francisco will be the lead <br />agency in the preparation of the EIR even though the park is under the juris- <br />diction of Alameda County. Councilmember Brandes stated there was concern by <br />the Board members of the East Bay Regional Park District that this project <br />should have an EIR. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sam Medford, Recreational Manager, stated he had met this week with <br />all appropriate agencies to determine which direction to go, and that Chandler <br />Lee will receive a copy of the EIR when it is prepared. <br /> <br />No action was taken by Council on the tiem. <br /> <br />Tri-Valley Transportation Committee Report <br /> Councilmember Wilson stated that when this committee was formed he thought <br />it was for the purpose of finding a project that all five tri-valley cities <br />could gain from, which he thought was a great idea. Now it seems to be get- <br />ting very deep and questionable as to whether or not this will be another <br />layer of government. He stated there is talk of a Joint Powers Agreement, <br />which he is opposed to. He stated he would continue to attend the meeting and <br />will keep Council informed. He felt the committee should find one project <br />that all cities could gain from. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Mohr advised she attended the last meeting at which time <br />committee members were asking for direction. She stated she shares Council- <br />member Wilson's concern that this does not evolve into something complex. She <br />advised it is an opportunity for the tri-valley cities to mesh together a com- <br />prehensive valley-wide street and freeway improvement program to best serve <br />the Valley needs. She hoped the committee is an on-going process but felt <br />they need to be in agreement. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer stated he is in favor of most of the goals and objectives; he <br />is opposed to lobbying, and has some concerns with coordination of regional <br />transportation improvements. He stated that JPA's have worked well in other <br />projects and he is in favor of that. <br /> <br />Councilmember Brandes concurred with the comments of Mayor Mercer. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer instructed Councilmember Wilson to refer the comments of <br />Council to the committee. <br /> <br />221 <br /> <br />7 - 7-7-87 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.