My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN041696
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
CCMIN041696
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:45 AM
Creation date
5/13/1999 10:12:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/16/1996
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
Item 6g <br />On-going discussion regarding, San FranCiSCO Bernal PrOperty and CQ0perative PlSnnln_~ <br />Process for the San Francisco Water Department - Bernal Avenue Site~ consideration of <br />further consultant services for the San Francisco Bernal Pronertv. (SR 96: 124) <br /> <br /> Brian Swift presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarvet indicated that the master plan must be refined regardless of any other action, <br />in order to get to the specific plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated there is a two step process: to refine the plan pursuant to the <br />comments at the April 11 meeting; and then to make sure the issues that affect the plan, such <br />as the golf course and traffic, are considered. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarvet asked whether San Francisco is willing to have the City adopt design <br />guidelines. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated yes and the guidelines would be included with all the city approvals <br />including the development agreement. He felt the specific or master PUD development plan <br />would include further planning steps in order to come up with final landscape plans, details of <br />the Village Greens, etc. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis asked about sweet layout, lot design etc. How can you do a specific plan <br />with no design guidelines incorporated into it? <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated it depends on how detailed you want the specific plan to be. He <br />indicated there is a range from very general (the North Sycamore Specific Plan as an example) <br />to very specific. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis believed people were very concerned about how the project will look and felt <br />there was a desire to have a more detailed specific plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated there will be street sections, some standards on how land uses will <br />develop, but there will not be as much detail as a usual Calthorpe plan. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti referred to the April 11 meeting and she questioned what the original <br />Calthorpe contract included. She asked what has the City gotten for the fees so far and what <br />is left to be done as pan of the contract. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated the original contract did not include a specific plan. A specific plan <br />is a very detailed project and costs about $150,000, not $48,000. The original task was to <br />develop two different land use plans following the basic land use mix incorporated in the <br />Cooperative Plan: one with a golf course and one without a golf course. The contract also <br /> <br />04/16/96 <br /> -7- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.