Laserfiche WebLink
165 <br /> <br />not agree to this fee. A sub-committee which included Ms. <br />Scribner, Mayor Mercer, members of the School Board and a few <br />developers then met and agreed on a tentative agreement to raise <br />approximately $45-55 million of additional monies for the School <br />District. He then referred to the Ruby Hill project and indicated <br />that it pays for itself. There will be no sewer capacity needed <br />for the San Francisco property. The San Francisco Plan includes an <br />agreement that for each gallon of water or sewer it would return <br />one gallon and re-use it through reverse-osmosis. Mayor Mercer <br />pointed out that each developer is conditioned that if sewer or <br />water is not available and the time the developer would be <br />developing, building permits will not be granted. At the 7/21/92 <br />City Council meeting Council approved the Water Reuse and Recycling <br />Plan of Zone 7 and Dublin San Ramon Services District which showed <br />that Pleasanton would be reusing and recycling water. The City is <br />approaching an agreement for 40 million gallon per day with the <br />Contra Costa Sanitary District. All of the projects included in <br />the list were approved with the help of the neighbors working with <br />the developers. He understood that there was 450,000 gallons of <br />sewer capacity available. That is more than enough to sewer <br />anything that would be approved on this growth management. <br /> <br /> Mr. Elliott agreed. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer explained the process that he and Mr. Butler took <br />in deciding which projects were approved and for the number of <br />units allowed. He andMr. Butler met with the larger builders with <br />long term agreements and asked them if they were intending to build <br />all of their units in 1993. It was agreed that the units that were <br />not expected to be built would be pushed to the future instead of <br />back logged. Mayor Mercer then explained how he and Mr. Butler <br />arrived at the figure of 270 units per year average. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr referred to the new school projected to be built on <br />the Chu property. She asked if the school would only be 10% full. <br />She understood that the School District would not justify building <br />a new school unless the existing schools are 25% over capacity. <br />She was concerned because by 1996 it was only expected that the <br />school's would be at ten percent over capacity not 25%. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift explained the enrollment process of the School <br />District. A new school would eliminate the portable rooms at the <br />existing school's campus not the number of students in each <br />classroom. Boundaries could also be changed. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer pointed out that the State has a rule that reads <br />that every classroom has to be full to its limit. He explained <br />that the State will not give the full amount of funds to the School <br />District to build a new school if the school is not at its <br />capacity. <br /> <br />8/4/92 7 <br /> <br /> <br />