My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN102699
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
CCMIN102699
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:17 AM
Creation date
2/1/2000 7:02:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/26/1999
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
It was moved by Ms. Ayala, seconded by Ms. Dennis, to select the Dublin <br />Iron Horse Trail corridor as the second priority. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Ayala, Dennis, Michelotti, and Mayor Tarvcr <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: Councilmember Pico <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis suggested reconsideration of the Spotorno preannexation agreement. Ms. <br />Michelotti supported that. Ms. Ayala did not. Mayor Tarver also agreed with tabling the <br />agreement until there was a PUD to consider. He did not want staff to spend time on this <br />and be at the same place as before. If the suggestion is to make the agreement very <br />simple and just give a limited time to get a project, consistent with the Specific Plan, <br />build the bypass road, etc., he would not object to looking at that. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush asked for clarification because he thought that was what was in the <br />original document. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver wanted a short, limited time frame for development fights. It would <br />specify conformance with the Specific Plan and more, including what is envisioned as <br />product types and many other things approved in the General Plan related to the Spotomo <br />property. Some level of specificity would be required but also an understanding that <br />there is no way Council will be sued for denial of a project. As far as he can tell, it will <br />require a developer willing to put forth an acceptable project. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta said if Council wants a very different product type than what has <br />come before it, it must clarify that. For example, if Council prefers a townhouse product <br />over a single family dwelling, that should be stated. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti felt the agreement could include some movement of density to the <br />flat land. <br /> <br />Mr. Roush thought that might take a Specific Plan amendment. <br /> <br /> Ms. Acosta said that is part of the difficulty. There is so much detail to be worked <br />out in a short time. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis said the staff report could be used as a basis for suggesting that those <br />concerns be addressed to staffs satisfaction. <br /> <br />Ms. Ayala asked why this was being done. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 23 <br />Minutes <br /> <br />10/26/99 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.