My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
081815
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/14/2015 2:34:58 PM
Creation date
8/12/2015 2:18:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
8/18/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
01
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
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
This compares favorably to the potable water connection fee of $150,000 for the same size meter, <br /> which also equals DSRSD's recycled water connection fee. As not all development is equipped with the <br /> same size meter, the actual connection fee for a development project is extrapolated from the common <br /> denominator using the appropriate meter equivalent. <br /> Ms. Wagner stated that staff recommends the City Council adopt the proposed Recycled Water <br /> Connection Fee rates. These would be incorporated into the city's Master Fee Schedule and become <br /> effective August 1, 2015 with annual adjustments equal to changes in the Engineering News Record <br /> Construction Cost Index annually beginning January 1, 2017. Staff also recommends that the city <br /> update the actual calculation for connection fees every 5 years or when a new Capital Improvement <br /> Program, facility plan or comprehensive system plan is approved or updated by the city, whichever is <br /> sooner. <br /> Mayor Thorne asked what size meter single-family residential project has. <br /> Ms. Wagner stated 5/8", which would equal a connection fee of approximately $15,000 versus a <br /> potable connection fee of$30,000. <br /> Councilmember Narum asked how previously approved development projects, such as the Summerhill <br /> project at Hacienda, will be billed. <br /> Ms. Wagner explained that had previously estimated a connection fee equal to about 50% of that for <br /> potable water, which was confirmed by this analysis. Projects such as CLC were advised of the <br /> potential for either an increase or refund based on whatever fee was ultimately determined, but most <br /> were quite happy pay the fee as it was considerably less expensive than a potable water connection <br /> would have been. <br /> Mayor Thorne opened and closed the public hearing. <br /> MOTION: It was m/s by Narum/Brown to waived full reading and adopt Resolution No. 15-777 <br /> amending the Master Fee Schedule to add new connection fees for recycled water. Motion passed by <br /> the following vote: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers Brown, Narum, Olson, Pentin, Mayor Thorne <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: None <br /> 25. Review and consider the Alviso Adobe Community Park Strategic Plan <br /> Community Services Manager Crose provided a brief presentation on the history of the Alviso Adobe <br /> Community Park. She reported that after about 5 years of intensive operation and continuous growth <br /> following its opening in 2008, the community expressed the sentiment that perhaps the site was <br /> underutilized and could reach its full potential with some minor capital improvements and additional <br /> resources. In June 2013 the City Council modified its Work Plan to include a Strategic Plan for the park <br /> and in July 2014 the city approved formation of a 9 member task force to assist in preparing the plan. <br /> The Task Force held a total of 4 meetings between the fall of 2014 and spring of 2015, with full community <br /> engagement throughout the process. Staff completed an environmental scan summarizing the history of <br /> the park, providing information regarding maintenance and programming budgets and staffing, current <br /> programs and partnerships. The public was invited to participate in 2 community meetings at which they <br /> were asked to share what they liked about the current park and what they would like to see changed in <br /> the future. At a separate meeting, 13 members of staff were invited to participate in a SWOT analysis <br /> exercise. Additional outreach included an Austin/Castleridge properties informational meeting as well as <br /> an online survey for which the 425 responses regarding the public's preferences for the park. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 12 of 17 July 21,2015 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.