CCMIN080795 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Michelotti stated that if the Council were in a joint process, it would be different than what happened with Ruby Hill. Mr. Roush stated that the City was involved to some extent with Ruby Hill. He stated that with the joint planning process the City would be more involved with this particular site than with Ruby Hill. Ms. Dennis commented that the County's comments were adopted by the Land Use and Transportation Subcommittee of the Board; which means it is just not a staff position. Mr. Roush stated that it had been prepared by staff to give to the subcommittee for the its consideration, but it wasn't clear to him if the subcommittee adopted it. Ms. Acosta stated that the Land Use and Transportation subcommittee was in concurrence with what staff was recommending. Brian Arkin, 7355 Lemonwood Way, stated that he was upset that he knew nothing of the project. He requested to be put on mailing lists for any and all information on this subject. He had seen the advertisement in the newspaper which is why he had come to the meeting and asked for any available staff reports. Mayor Tarver stated he would have staff give a more detailed summary of the proposal from the County and would have discussion at the Council level in terms as to what it perceives the issues to be. Mr. Jones suggested a City-wide newsletter. Mayor Tarvet stated that a flyer is sent out on a quarterly basis from the Recreation Department and in the front is a newsletter for the City. Ms. Acosta stated a six page newsletter was tried for 18 months. It wasn't getting a wide enough readership, so it is sent out with the Recreation Department flyer. Mr. Roush asked if the Council might want to bring the viewers and audience up to date on how the proposed cooperative planning process document came about. Mayor Tarver stated that at the County Planning Commission meeting in Dublin, he presented the City's view that it wanted to annex the property and it wanted planning control of the property. If that wasn't possible, and it appeared that the Board of Supervisors was not going to relinquish the land use control, he made the suggestion to have a joint planning process that yielded a consensus plan which puts Pleasanton at the table. The Planning Commission asked the applicant if it would be willing to do a joint process. The applicant was not willing to do that because it felt Pleasanton had not been honest and open with it, it hadn't processed 08/07/95 -4-