My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN020696
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
CCMIN020696
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:45 AM
Creation date
5/13/1999 9:58:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/6/1996
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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. Tarver was not in support of a separate Council workshop, because other <br /> Commissioners have indicated they felt left out of this process. Mr. Tarver also could not see <br /> a date available for a Council workshop. He also wanted time for the Commissions and <br /> consultant to provide alternatives to review. He also did not want to burn out the public on <br /> meetings. There were enough meetings scheduled already without adding another Council <br /> workshop. He felt the timeline presented by staff was good and should be followed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis also felt it was more efficient to bring as many people together as possible <br /> and favored the joint workshops. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta stressed that the process needs to be focussed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti referred to the plan she had prepared relocating the golf course and <br /> commercial/office with the hotel near the freeway and overlooking the goff course. She felt <br /> attention needs to be focused on the knoll area. She was concerned about the site for the school. <br /> She also wanted attention given to the lighted park and the timing. She believed there were fees <br /> available to work with in getting the park improved early. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver referred to conflicts between the timeline for the General Plan review and <br /> the San Francisco property review. He did not want to exclude the General Plan Steering <br /> Committee from participating in the joint workshops. <br /> <br />" Mr. Swift strongly recommended not changing the General Plan review dates. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver suggested the joint workshop dates be changed then so they do not conflict <br /> with the General Plan review dates. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico wanted to be able to attend the General Plan assembly meetings and agreed <br /> there should not be any conflicts. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated staff would do the best it can to rearrange the dates. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Pico, seconded by Ms. Michelotti, to approve the time line with <br /> a request for staff to fix the conflicts in dates with the General Plan review dates. <br /> The roll Call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers - Dennis, Michelotti, Pico and Mayor Tarver <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: Councilmember Mohr <br /> ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> 02~06/96 14 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.