My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN110403
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
CCMIN110403
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:38 AM
Creation date
10/28/2003 1:33:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
11/4/2003
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN1104203
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
Mr. Campbell asked for a time line in establishing the task force and studying the <br />redevelopment of Kottinger Place and Pleasanton Gardens. <br /> <br /> With this type of project, Mr. Boeian indicated it would take eight to twelve <br />months to reach the first stage. The first stage would be in flushing out the major issues <br />and moving forward with a Request for Proposal. The Request for Proposal would either <br />identify a developer that has experience with redevelopment in public housing projects, <br />who is willing to step forward and take the lead, or a eonsuitant that could assist the task <br />force with trying to formulate the parameters of the project. He advised that it might take <br />multiple years to achieve the results, as dealing with the park and funding issue take time. <br />He was hopeful that it could be done quicker. <br /> <br /> If the property were redeveloped, Ms. Hosterman wondered if the funding by <br />HUD would disappear?. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian indicated that staffhad not yet done extensive research in the matter. <br />He anticipates this issue will be one of the issues looked at. When the study was <br />conducted in 2001, the consultant indicated there was the potential for retaining the <br />affordability of the projects but the issue could not be resolved until there was a complete <br />application. In order to get to an application submitted to HUD to redevelop the project, <br />a project was required. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan concurred with Ms. Hosterman's comments and noted that the <br />task force needs to look at this matter very seriously because if HUD financing went <br />away, it would be a major obstacle. <br /> <br /> Ms. Hosterman pointed out that value of the projects in the community, which <br />serve a special need within the community. The reason she asked that this item be <br />continued was due to her overall concern of making the transfer of frail, elderly people <br />from one location to another. She wondered how people could be displaced for a period <br />of time, which was of great concern to her. Even if Council did determine that this <br />project was a good thing to do, she was interested in hearing how people could be moved <br />from one location to another. <br /> <br /> Mayor Pico believed the task force would be charged to look into the HUD <br />financing. He believed Council was not here to discuss every single issue; the discussion <br />was whether or not Council wanted to ere. ate a task force. <br /> <br />Mayor Pico asked for public comments. <br /> <br /> Brace Fiedler, resident of Pleasanton Gardens, referred to a headline in a recent, <br />local newspaper. He disagreed with the headline and stated that Kottinger Place was not <br />too old; it is energy efficient and does have high, per-unit, management and operating <br />costs. It does need a plan for redevelopment and provision for additional units to meet <br />the needs of the baby boomers reaching retirement in the next several years. He pointed <br />out that none of the items are tied into the age of the facility. Kottinger Place has decent, <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 21 11/4/03 <br />M'mutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.