Laserfiche WebLink
23 <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that the TDR concept would provide the <br />opportunity for property owners to accrue some value on their <br />properties through the assignment of portions of those properties <br />as open space. At the same time, it would achieve the City's <br />desire to leave that part of the Valley as open space. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver expressed concern about two issues. First, he <br />stated that although the TDR concept would not preclude the City's <br />General Plan concept of keeping an open space between the cities, <br />he would like to see a statement from Pleasanton indicating that <br />the City would like to maintain that separation in the area between <br />the two cities. Second, he mentioned that in 1986, the City did a <br />residential review which permitted a maximum holding capacity of <br />one unit per five acres. He added that he would object to the <br />proposal if it involved gross, rather than developable area. <br /> , <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Butler, and seconded by Mr. Mercer, that <br />Resolution No. 91-13 be adopted, approving the South Livermore <br />Valley Plan Concept, as set forth in the Staff Report, subject to <br />the following conditions: (1) that the Pleasanton Gateway be <br />redesignated in the Plan to allow either Agricultural or <br />Residential use; (2) that the density range be revised to allow 0 <br />to 4 units per acre, subject to a General Plan Study of the <br />Vineyard Corridor; (3) that cultivable lands within the Gateway <br />generally not be allowed to develop, subject to City-conducted <br />studies of the area; (4) that language be added to clarify that <br />Pleasanton is the intended jurisdiction for planning and annexing <br />land within the Gateway; (5) that the land be serviced according to <br />City design standards and levels of service; and (6) that the <br />provision to allow the substitution of cultivable land elsewhere in <br />the Study Area and the waiver of the $30,000 per unit fee be <br />deleted. <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 />12. REPORTS OF THE CITY MANAGER <br />Item 12a <br />Selection of Name for the Proposed Senior Center <br /> <br /> Ms. Bengtson presented her report (SR 91:34) regarding the <br />matter. <br /> <br /> - 9 - <br /> 1-22-91 <br /> <br /> <br />