My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN030592
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
CCMIN030592
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:03 AM
Creation date
10/29/1999 10:06:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Ms. Terry Spraggins stated that there was not any State or <br />federal laws that governed the processes under how the Committee <br />worked. <br /> <br /> Sharrell Michelotti, 7873 Olive Court, asked that Council work <br />with the City Attorney and approve language that was fair and <br />equitable. She reiterated Mr. Butler's suggestions. Her concerns <br />with the Plan included access from Pleasanton to this project, <br />which was not addressed in the language, and she felt that the <br />public should know that 2,640 homes would be needed to finance the <br />acquisition of the open space and parkland. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, Mr. Mercer declared the <br />public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Scribner felt that the ballot language should be very <br />simple. She had several people read the different versions of the <br />ballot language, who were not familiar with the Ridge and all of <br />them were confused by the language. She agreed with Mr. Butler <br />that the language should read as follows, "Shall the General Plan <br />of the City of Pleasanton be amended as recommended by the <br />Pleasanton Ridgelands Committee". <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush explained that if the Council wished to take action <br />on this, there would first have to be a motion to reconsider its <br />previous action taken on March 3, 1992. The motion would have to <br />be made by one of the Councilmembers that voted in the majority on <br />that matter. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Scribner, and seconded by Mr. Butler, to <br />reconsider the ballot language adopted on March 3, 1992 which read <br />as follows: "Shall the General Plan of the City of Pleasanton be <br />amended by adopting the Pleasanton Ridgelands Plan, which provides <br />a mechanism to permanently retain the undeveloped ridges above <br />Pleasanton and provide, as economically feasible, open space on <br />approximately 80% of the area for the creation of publicly- <br />accessible parkland, trails and other recreational facilities? The <br />plan would permit, in areas not visible from Pleasanton but within <br />the 7100 acres of the Ridgelands, absolutely no more than 2,640 <br />residential units with associated neighborhood-serving retail for <br />the purpose of generating the funds necessary to finance public <br />acquisition of these open areas at no additional cost to existing <br />taxpayers." <br /> <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Scribner, Tarver and Mayor <br /> Mercer <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />3/5/92 6 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.