Laserfiche WebLink
313 <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr stated that whether or not to build a school on the <br />Del Prado site is the District's decision; not the City's. She <br />pointed out that community assets need to be used in the manner <br />that will best serve the community, regardless of whether such <br />assets are owned by the City or the District. She indicated that <br />the District needs a bus barn and that the Stoneridge property <br />would be a reasonable site for such use. She expressed regret that <br />the City cannot get extra soccer fields but was optimistic that <br />there will be other resources in the community to expand organized <br />team sports. With respect to Growth Management, she stated that <br />granting Growth Management to an approved PUD adds value to the <br />property. She proposed that the District's properties, including <br />that on Abbie Street, go through the same PUD process as other <br />properties do, but that the District get the priority for Growth <br />Management approval. She stated.that she has a conflict of <br />interest on the Sycamore site but pointed out that the site has an <br />incredible value whose benefits should be realized. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler commented that the City and the School District has <br />reach a great deal of consensus regarding the property exchange. <br />He clarified that the City cannot guarantee the District anything <br />more than to look at the District's development proposals. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked Staff if any part of the 14 acres of the <br />Stoneridge property would be needed to give the Dublin San Ramon <br />Services District (DSRSD) the capability of accommodating a reverse <br />osmosis plant at the site, in the event that the Ruby Hill project <br />is annexed and funds are generated for that plant. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta replied that DSRSD has indicated that a reverse <br />osmosis plant would be an option it would consider if it purchased <br />the property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler stated that he would support any arrangement that <br />would accommodate the District's need for at least seven acres in <br />exchange for the property that the City has been using as a <br />recreational facility. He added, however, that it would make most <br />sense from the planning perspective if the Stoneridge property <br />remained as one piece and an agreement were worked out with the <br />District to set aside a certain portion for public use as a reverse <br />osmosis plant. With respect to the rest of the package, he <br />indicated that it would be the District's responsibility to <br />determine the uses for the Del Prado, Abbie Street, and Sycamore <br />sites. He agreed with Ms. Mohr that PUD approvals precede any <br />Growth Management exemptions or approvals and that any District <br />property approved for PUD be given preference for Growth Management <br />allocations made for the coming year. <br /> <br /> - 17 - <br /> 7-16-91 <br /> <br /> <br />