My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN040604
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
CCMIN040604
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:39 AM
Creation date
4/1/2004 10:24:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/6/2004
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN040604
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
brought up a very valid point, but she believed Council, at its priorities workshop, could <br />address it and discuss further what the needs are for Pleasanton. <br /> <br />Ms. McKeehan noted that this project is on Council's list of priorities to discuss. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky remembered when the current library was built in 1988, it seemed <br />large compared to the previous library. He believed the library was as equally important <br />to the community as additional sports fields and a youth center. He enthusiastically <br />supported the needs assessment study to figure out how the City can accomplish its goals <br />prior to build out. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan pointed out that the existing library was designed perfectly for a <br />long period of time. It would have been sufficient if Pleasanton had not become a <br />municipal library. If the Pleasanton Library were still a branch of the County library <br />system, the existing library would be an appropriate size, and it would be functioning <br />adequately. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Hosterman, seconded by Mr. Brozosky, to authorize the <br />Library Commission to proceed with the del~mition of a scope of work for consultant <br />services for a library space needs assessment, to solicit RFPs from qualified <br />consultants, and for Council to discuss the matter further at its priorities workshop. <br /> <br />The roll call vote was taken as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers - Ayala, Brozosky, Campbell, Hosterman, and <br /> <br /> Mayor Pico <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />There was a break at 8:55 p.m. <br /> <br />The meeting reconvened at 9:04 p.m. <br /> <br />6c <br /> Report on the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Livermore <br /> Municipal Airport Master Plan Update. (SR 04:074) <br /> <br /> Brian Swit% Director of Planning and Community Development, presented the <br />staff report. <br /> <br /> Mayor Pico said that the City of Livermore and its Airport Commission have been <br />unresponsive to the issues and concerns that Pleasanton has raised in its letters to the City <br />of Livermore. In the event that the City of Livermore continues to be unresponsive to the <br />issues and concerns of the residents of Pleasanton and the Pleasanton City Council, he <br />asked what types of actions are available to the City, particularly in the event that it <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 12 04/06/04 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.