My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
08 ATTACHMENTS 4-10
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2010
>
020210
>
08 ATTACHMENTS 4-10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2010 4:43:42 PM
Creation date
1/28/2010 2:29:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
2/2/2010
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
08 ATTACHMENTS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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
Commissioner Blank stated that in looking at the questions, he was not sure the <br /> questions were in the right order and if they were asking the right questions. He <br /> indicated that he sees a nexus between Questions 1 and 2 because one cannot be <br /> done without the other. He noted that the fundamental question is what Mr. Dolan <br /> stated: "Are you willing to amend the Specific Plan and a whole series of steps would <br /> follow a "yes" answer, and another series of steps if the answer is "no." He then <br /> inquired if Question 3 is independent of Questions 1 and 2 and if a rezone could take <br /> place without a modification to the Specific Plan. He stated that he thinks the same <br /> question is being asked three different ways and that he was not sure what the delta <br /> was among the questions. <br /> Mr. Dolan clarified that all the questions build on one another and that if the <br /> Commission will not respond to Question 1, the rest of the questions would be <br /> irrelevant, and if it does not discuss Question 2, the following questions would be <br /> irrelevant as well, and so forth. <br /> Commissioner Blank said this was good to know because it appears that each of the <br /> questions is of equal importance and they are clearly not. He noted that Question 5 <br /> does not sound like it is related to whether or not the Happy Valley Specific Plan is <br /> modified and inquired if he was reading this correctly. Ms. Amos replied that he was <br /> and this would be separate from the Specific Plan. <br /> Commissioner Blank clarified that Question 6 and Question 7 are independent question <br /> depending on what the answers to Questions 1 through 4 are. Ms. Amos replied that <br /> this was correct. <br /> Chair Pearce noted that Question 1 was the threshold question. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> Commissioners Blank and Commissioner Narum disclosed that they know Mr. Schlies <br /> socially and have not discussed the project with him. <br /> Christopher Schlies stated that he has been Bill Wentworth's attorney for about <br /> 20 years but that he is here because he played a second -seat role in the Bypass Road <br /> litigation a few years ago and is very familiar with many of the issues. He noted that <br /> Don Babbitt is Mr. Wentworth's hired developer and is great when it comes to technical <br /> issues. <br /> Mr. Schlies stated that he wanted to discuss the legal context of the General Plan <br /> Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment. He stated that the property is unique in <br /> that it is the last undeveloped property adjacent to the golf course and that the City has <br /> an opportunity to plan what type of neighbor this will be in perpetuity. He noted that the <br /> City has a championship golf course, that there is civic pride attached to it, and that the <br /> fundamental question for them to answer is whether or not the Commission wants two <br /> EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, January 14, 2009 Page 4 of 14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.