My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11 ATTACHMENT 01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
101513
>
11 ATTACHMENT 01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2013 4:44:04 PM
Creation date
10/9/2013 4:18:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/15/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
72
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
Mr. Rasmussen replied that the actual line is just a little way over from where it is shown <br /> right now. He noted that the other three plans show the line coming over to the west, <br /> and the reason is that this location would connect to the driveway at Shadow Cliffs and <br /> there is a median break and traffic signal there. He stated that another alternative is to <br /> bring El Charro Road straight down. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor noted that all the Alternatives show some development <br /> occurring outside the UGB, and in a lot of cases, it is just parkland or industrial, except <br /> where the road curves, which has some of the other uses such as campus office. He <br /> inquired what the mechanism is that would allow development outside the UGB, and <br /> what would actually have to happen before that could be done. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that the language that addresses that subject gives guidance, but it is <br /> not crystal clear; the UGB was adopted, and then the language was incorporated into <br /> the General Plan such that very similar language appears in both places. He indicated <br /> that it essentially says that minor adjustments may be made, but it does not define what <br /> a minor adjustment is. He added that the General Plan talks a lot about the fact that <br /> adjustments will be explored, and the Task Force talked a lot about this, although there <br /> has been no resolution. <br /> Mr. Dolan stated that the evolution of his thinking is to determine if the adjustment is <br /> minor relative to the immediate plan area or as a percentage of the entire acreage <br /> within the UGB, which affects the perspective on whether the adjustment is minor or <br /> major. He indicated that his opinion is that under any scenario, this decision will <br /> probably ultimately fall to the Council regarding what approach to take. He noted that <br /> he believes moving El Charro Road over a little bit to catch a little more area would not <br /> be anything more than a minor adjustment of the UGB. He further noted that the Task <br /> Force has been pretty consistent, and there is a general consensus, to go all the way <br /> out to the edge of the planning area, with the primary reason being to generate enough <br /> revenue in the development to fund the improvements; whether or not that expansion is <br /> still minor is the question, and staff does not have any answer. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor asked Mr. Dolan if he is referring to the actual development <br /> where the industrial area is on the map. <br /> Mr. Dolan said yes. <br /> Chair Blank inquired what the process would be if it were decided that it is a major <br /> adjustment. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that it would then have to go to the voters. <br /> Chair Blank inquired if it would be in a general election or any election. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that he was not sure it specified the type of election. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 22, 2013 Page 9 of 30 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.