Laserfiche WebLink
319 <br /> <br /> Park and Recreation Commission Recommendation Regarding the Pro- <br /> posed Project to Cover Pleasanton Canal <br /> Mr. Walker presented the report of the Director of Parks and <br /> Community Services (IR 85:21) dated April 10, 1985, regarding <br /> this matter. No action was required or taken by Council on the <br /> item. <br /> <br /> Interviews for Planning Commissioner and Alternate Planning <br /> Commissioner <br /> Mr. Walker presented his memorandum dated April 9, 1985, <br /> regarding this matter. After discussion, Council scheduled in- <br /> terviews for Planning Commissioner and Alternate Planning Commis- <br /> sioner on May 7, 1985, beginning at 7:15 P.M. <br /> <br /> Vice Mayor Brandes requested that consideration of terms of <br /> Alternate Commision Members be discussed regarding the policy <br /> relative to limitation of two full terms on any board or <br /> commission. <br /> <br /> Discussion Related to Long Term Agreements <br /> Mr. Walker presented a memorandum containing information <br /> relative to long term agreement negotiations. <br /> <br /> Vice Mayor Brandes advised that he and Mayor Mercer, as the <br />Council Subcommittee, have met with all of the developers includ- <br />ing EVH Partnership, and now need direction from Council regard- <br />ing the number of units to be approved in 1986 and 1987 through <br />long term agreements and which projects Council would like the <br />Committee to proceed with negotiations. <br /> <br /> Council discussed ensued regarding the various projects and <br />various advantages the project might provide as a condition of <br />their PUD approval. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Mohr stated that in evaluating this and in an- <br />ticipating the discussions she had the feeling it was almost a <br />chick and the egg - it is hard until Council knows how many units <br />we have to give away to determine what projects might fit within <br />that scope. On the other hand Council needs to know what proj- <br />ects it is that we would like to see accommodated in order to <br />come back with a number. <br /> <br /> At the request of Vice Mayor Brandes, the City Manager re- <br />viewed conditions of approval to the Mike Valley/Shadow Cliffs <br />Villages, Tawny/Dunkley, and EVH projects. Vice Mayor Brandes <br />summarized offers from various developers from the negotiations <br />and pointed out that those were preliminary offers and could be <br />changed through negotiation. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Wood stated he did not think Council should <br />enter into any long term agreements with developers east of First <br />Street until the Valley/Stanley extension is started. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Butler stated he felt Council needed a formal <br />recommendation from the Committee; the way the requests seem to <br />be shaping up there may be three projects hopeful of getting the <br /> <br /> Page 15 4-16-85 <br /> <br /> <br />