My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN030204
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
CCMIN030204
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:39 AM
Creation date
2/26/2004 8:27:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/2/2004
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN030204
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
Mayor Pico said that his original motion included the uses as shown on the map <br />for Master Plan 1. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala believed her substitute motion gave more latitude for the sports people. <br />She indicated that her substitute motion would also offer the designers the elements in <br />Master Plan 1 and in Master Plan 2 for all the sports fields, l-Ier substitute motion <br />provided for a design of up to eight lighted sports fields. She believed the lights were <br />important to the sports groups, although they realized it would not all be coming at one <br />time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Campbell said he could not support the substitute motion. He thought there <br />needed to be an ironclad guarantee that those fields were going to be incorporated some <br />how, some way, into the plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky believed Mr. Campbell was concerned with the language "up to" <br />eight lighted sports fields <br /> <br /> Mr. Campbell agreed. At the very least, he wanted that number of fields <br />incorporated into every plan that will be submitted, if he were going to approve a design <br />contest. <br /> <br /> Mayor Pico said that it was not the intent of his motion because he wanted to <br />allow for an unconstrained design so that the designers would be able to provide more <br />than one plan. He said he was not supportive of the substitute motion because it was too <br />broad. <br /> <br />Mr. Campbell said he could not support including an all-weather field. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky said the only reason he had suggested an all weather field was <br />because some of the fields, like the baseball diamonds, would be completely fenced off. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala said she would be willing to amend the motion that the design include <br />eight lighted sports fields. That way the designers will have more latitude to design it, <br />but using the designs that have already been brought fonvard in one plan approved by the <br />Parks and Recreation Commission. She believed that the plan that Parks and Recreation <br />brought forward would probably be the ideal plan that the sports groups would be looking <br />for. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky said that another way of saying this is that each designer needs to <br />include a plan that has eight fields in it, and each designer can submit an option plan that <br />has fewer than eight sports fields, if that is what Council would like to see. <br /> <br /> Mr. Campbell said he did not agree with that because if a designer submitted a <br />plan that did not include the eight lighted sports fields, the plan could potentially be <br />chosen. He wanted a plan that was going to have the eight sports fields. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 20 03/02/04 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.