My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN020403
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
CCMIN020403
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:36 AM
Creation date
2/27/2003 5:04:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/4/2003
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN020403
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
meetings and commitments regarding the road. At the last meeting, Council stated the property <br />owner had the burden to provide the road. Mr. Close said the property owner told him it will <br />never happen. He asked if it was common practice for the City to develop a project one mile <br />from the nearest City maintained street. Does the City often create mile-long residential or <br />commercial courts or cul de sacs, such as the one created by Tentative Tract Map 7372? Without <br />a proper access to the project, Council should revoke Tentative Tract Map 7372. <br /> <br /> Bruce Torquemada, 3072 Alburni Court, indicated as much funding as possible is <br />necessary for educating children and providing things like class size reduction, attracting top <br />teachers, etc. He has been on the budget committee with the School District and referred to <br />allocations for the motor pool. He believed it would be beneficial if the City and the District <br />combined motor pool resources to save money. It is important to work together. He also felt <br />personnel contracts negotiated two or three years ago should be revisited since the economic <br />times have changed. <br /> <br />Mayor Pico asked staffto respond to the above comments. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan indicated the City does work with the District to share resources. She <br />acknowledged that the City and District did share vehicle maintenance and she felt that could <br />work again, but the District made the decision to separate. Staff is open to the possibility. There <br />have been many examples over the last few years to work together. Regarding the New Cities <br />project, there will be an agenda item in the near future, possibly March 4. The Summerhill <br />project was denied by the Planning Commission and Council based on a staff recommendation <br />for denial. <br /> <br />There were no other speakers. <br /> <br />7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL <br /> <br /> (Due to the fact that two Councilmembers must abstain from the last agenda item, this <br />portion of the agenda was moved forward.) <br /> <br /> Ms. Hosterman asked when staff would bring back the one issue raised in conjunction <br />with raising the speed limits in various parts of town. <br /> <br />Ms. McKeehan believed it would be some time in March. <br /> <br /> Mayor Pico urged staff to continue to work with the general contractor on the golf course, <br />to make certain his crew adheres to speed limits and all the terms. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan indicated when complaints are received, staff speaks to the contractor and <br />has had very good response from the contractor. The Police Department has been working in the <br />area to issue tickets. As often happens when a neighborhood requests police enforcement, it is <br />the residents that are most often the violators and who are cited. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 4 02/04/03 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.