My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN080691
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
CCMIN080691
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:12 AM
Creation date
10/29/1999 10:46:21 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.
/
28
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
350 <br /> <br /> 4. CONSENT CALENDAR <br /> <br /> With respect to Item 4n - Form of Growth Management <br /> Agreements, Ms. Scribner pointed out that page 2 of the Staff <br /> Report states that "...building permits may be withheld if the City <br /> determines that insufficient water, as evidenced by 50% mandatory <br /> rationing or otherwise, is not available at the time building <br /> permits for the Project are applied for." She noted that Council <br /> had previously discussed adopting a general policy that would be <br /> applied to all the Growth Management agreements. She indicated <br /> that she has not seen any general policy, and yet a 50% mandatory <br /> rationing is being considered here. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta explained that the form of Growth Management is the <br /> first step in the process. She stated that what Staff has prepared <br /> and is presenting to Council for its comments is the standard form <br /> that the City will use for all Growth Management approvals. She <br /> continued that the general policy would then follow and would apply <br /> to those with previous Growth Management approvals who come in for <br /> a building permit. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer indicated that Item 4n would be removed from the <br /> Agenda and discussed at a future Council meeting. <br /> <br /> In connection with Item 4bb - Summary of Alameda CouDty <br /> General Plan Issue Paper 5: Growth Management, Ms. Scribner <br /> questioned if the matter should be discussed further since it <br /> involves Growth Management practices in the Tri-Valley area or if <br /> the Mayor's letter to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors <br /> indicates the City's strong opposition to the County's proposal. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer indicated that Item 4bb would be taken off the <br /> Consent Calendar and discussed under CITY MANAGER'S REPORT as <br /> Item 12b. <br /> <br /> Regarding Item 4cc - Appointment of Voting Delegate for Leaque <br /> of California Cities Annual Conference, Ms. Scribner inquired why <br /> Mr. Tarver is not being appointed as Pleasanton's voting delegate <br /> when he is the City's delegate to the League and has been going to <br /> all its meetings. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer replied that it has always been the tradition to <br /> appoint the Mayor as voting delegate and the Vice Mayor as <br /> alternate. He indicated that he is not opposed to appointing Mr. <br /> Tarver as the City's voting delegate; however, he would like <br /> Council to discuss how it would vote on the resolutions prior to <br /> the Conference. He added that he would not be at the Conference on <br /> October 16th and proposed that Ms. Mohr be appointed as alternate. <br /> <br /> - 2 - <br /> 8-6-91 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.