My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:021
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/22/2004 3:33:37 PM
Creation date
12/22/2004 3:08:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
1/4/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
12/02/200~ 10:~5 5~0~9~136~ VOLKER t~W OR,ICES PA6E <br /> <br />approved, by ~e County when it issued a surface mining permit in 1994, years before <br />Measure D's 2000 cn~cnn~ ~d ~us is not required to ~ccd~ vote~ <br /> Appcll~t SOS disputes ~is conclusion ~d. ~es that Msa$~8 <br /> "approved by ~e Co~W' contained ~n Policy 144 mnst bc read ~ conjunction wkh a <br /> ~cneral provision on application of th~ initiatiw, which states: <br /> ~erc is a l~gsl right to dcvdopm~n~, ~e res~icfions ~d rcqukcmcnts imposed by th~s <br /> ord~cc sh~l apply to d~vclopmcnt or proposed d~vcJopmcnt which has not rccd~cd <br /> all n.ecess~ discretton~ Couu~ ~d o~er aPProvals ~d pe~its prior to the eff~c~ve <br /> date of the ord~ce." <br /> SOS maintains d~at a qu~ h~ not receiv~ Coun~ approval within ~e toeing <br /> of Policy 144 unless fl~e qu~ h~ received "all uec*ss~ discretion~ CounW <br /> other approves ~d pemit~." SOS ac~owledged in the ~ co~ ~at ~e gener~ <br /> pro~isio~ is so bro~. ~at it ~g~bly encompasses wi~in its terns Mi approvals ~d <br /> pe~.i~s, bo& discr~ion~ ~d ministerial, but SOS offer~ to limi~ ~e provision to <br /> discretion~ approvals ~d pemits. <br /> SOS's offer is a reco~ihon of the fact ~at a ~ning operation is subject to <br /> o~going review, ~nspecfion, ~d approvals to ensue leg~ complimce. As Co~ <br /> Plmn~g Depm~ent staff obse~ed in fmd~g Meas~e D inapplicable m fl~e S~ol <br /> Valley qu~, "[~u~es ~e long-tern proje~s ~at require periodic reviews <br /> approvals of vinous kinds t~ugb.out ~e life of the projec~ generally over a period of <br /> decMes, ~ call~ for in the conditions a~acbed to the a~roval of~ S~face M~ing <br /> Pemit." If Meas~e D were inte~reted to require voter approvM for eve~ qu~ <br /> ouBide the ~b~ zone ~at had not r~eived "all approves ~d pemits," ~en at l~t <br /> eight other q~ies would be swept up by Me,me D because all qumes opera~ wi~ <br /> conditions a~ached to ~ek pe~t requking ~e approvals. <br /> SOS posits a middle ~o~d, where "approval" ~der Policy 144 is read to requke <br /> all discretio~ approves ~d pe~its, but not ministerial approvals ~d pemits. SOS <br /> ~gues that lhe Sunol Valley qu~' was not "approved" at fl~e time of ~e 5fifiative's <br /> effective date, despite phor issmce of a s~ace m~ing pe~k, because several <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.