Laserfiche WebLink
8. The conditions of approval at Planning Commission included a $30,000 fee for Bernal Park <br /> improvements. That condition has been removed. In effect, Ponderosa is agreeing to the <br /> substitution of one illegal fee (improvement obligation on non-historic home) for another illegal fee <br /> (Bernal Park fee). <br /> 9. The Bernal Park improvement fee was in addition to the adopted Park fee. It has not been <br /> adopted by any City ordinance, violates the Quimby Act on park fees (Government Code Sec. <br /> 66477), and violates the Government Code §§ 66000-66025 (the "Mitigation Fee Act"). Just as <br /> importantly, it burdens downtown redevelopment in a discriminatory way, discouraging outstanding <br /> infill projects like this one which will remove an eyesore and provide support population for downtown. <br /> I believe the Bernal Park fee originated with a last minute condition by Cindy McGovern on the <br /> Rainey project on Augustine Street, which Council went along with to achieve unanimity, and was a <br /> key factor in destroying the feasibility of that project. This kind of government lawlessness got <br /> Pleasanton into serious problems, and needs to end with this project. <br /> Thank you for considering these comments, and all the good work and good judgments that you <br /> make on behalf of the citizens of Pleasanton. <br /> Take care, Pete <br /> Peter MacDonald <br /> Law Office of Peter MacDonald <br /> Main Street, Suite <br /> Pleasanton, CA 94566 <br /> Phone: 925. <br /> 2 <br />