CCMIN081903 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Ayala asked about the remarks regarding whether the map is deemed approved because it is beyond the thirty-day period. Mr. Roush said the Permit Streamlining Act provides that if certain action is not taken on an application within a certain period of time, the application is deemed approved. The courts have determined, however, that language does not mean exactly what it says. Staff believes certain findings must be made in order to approve a tentative map, that notice requirements need to be met, etc. It is not black and white. The intent of the statute is to prevent an inordinant delay on applications. Staff can demonstrate that there were efforts to keep the application moving while there were difficult issues to be resolved. When one looks at the big picture, staff is comfortable a reasonable job was done to keep the application moving. He did not think a court would determine the application was deemed approved. Ms. Ayala referred to the ten gallon per minute solution was problematic. Mr. Swift explained how the capacity of a well is evaluated. The ideal is that the rate of pumping water out is equal to the rate the water is going into the well. The sustainable flow rate is how much water can be pumped out in a four-hour period while sustaining the equilibrium of the well. He went on to explain how pumps work. He acknowledged it was not easy to measure ten gallons per minute over four hours given the existing equipment. If the preference is to provide a lateral for emergency water, that condition could take the place of Condition #124. Mayor Pico asked the cost of a water hook up for a one inch meter? Mr. Swift said the standard residential connection is a 5/8" meter and that costs about $11,000. A one inch meter would be about $20,000. If the connection for the Brozosky property was from Vineyard Avenue, the Specific Plan requires a payment of the pro rata share of the water infrastructure. He estimated that would be another $15-20,000. It was moved by Mayor Pieo, seconded by Mr. Campbell, to replace Condition #124 with the requirement that the applicant pay for a 5/8 inch water meter and pay for a water line to the edge of the Brozosky property and if the Brozoskys want a larger meter, they would pay the difference. There was discussion about the motion and clarification of who pays the connection fees. A substitute motion was made by Mr. Campbell tracking Mayor Pico's motion but providing that the Brozoskys pay the water connection fee. The motion died for lack of a second. There was a break at 10:00 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:10 p.m. Pleasanton City Council 13 08/19/03 Minutes