My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN031505
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
CCMIN031505
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:41 AM
Creation date
3/10/2005 11:36:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/15/2005
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN031505
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
In response to an inquiry by Mr. Brozosky, Mr. Fiaiho noted that the City has a <br />reserve in place to lend approximately $1.6 million dollars, which is equal to the bond <br />payment. The requirement is that the City makes two payments over the course of 12 <br />months: the first payment is due in October 2005 and the second payment is due March <br />2006. <br /> <br /> As the bond payments are due, Mr. Brozosky asked if staff would come back to <br />Council requesting additional funds? <br /> <br /> Mr. Fialho said that a reserve is in place for the first bond payment. Bond <br />payments are made annually to pay back the debt, which will be factored into the City's <br />next budget process. He mentioned that at some point, staff would be shadng a pro-rata <br />formula with Council that shows the pay back and expected time frame. <br /> <br /> To follow up with a question asked by Mr. Close, Mr. Sullivan asked if the <br />Miscellaneous Reserve ClP Funds would take money away from any funded or <br />designated project? <br /> <br /> Mr. Fialho said the City has a reserve in place that was established as a result of <br />Council policy to assist for cost overruns as it relates to various CIP projects that the City <br />might undertake on a year-to-year basis. <br /> <br /> In response to an inquiry by Ms. McGovem, Mr. Roush said the property owner is <br />required to dedicate the land necessary for the bypass road; however, the Happy Valley <br />Specific Plan contemplated that the cost of construction would be divided between the <br />property owner and the City. He noted that approximately $1 million dollars has been <br />set aside to pay for the costs of the bypass road: half a million dollars came from the <br />New Cities Development and the other half the Council set aside a year ago. <br /> <br /> Ms. McGovern asked what is the percentage of the split of the cost for the <br />bypass road. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said the Specific Plan contemplated a two-thirds/one-thirds split based <br />on the traffic that was anticipated to be generated throughout the Specific Plan. He was <br />not aware of this ratio changing. <br /> <br /> Ms. McGovern asked if the ratio split was recorded and agreed upon? <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said the ratio split is written in the Specific Plan. As this project <br />moves forward, those ratios would be identified as part of what will be required to be <br />paid as part of the approval of the project. <br /> <br /> When the City worked with the Happy Valley residents towards annexation, Ms. <br />McGovern asked if the bypass road, as mentioned in the Specific Plan was included as <br />part of the annexation? <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush pointed out that the bypass road has always been a part of the Happy <br />Valley Specific Plan. When the annexation vote was proposed to the residents, it was <br />with the understanding that it was Council's intent that the bypass road would be <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 23 03/15/05 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.