My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN092104
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
CCMIN092104
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:40 AM
Creation date
9/14/2004 4:54:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/21/2004
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN092104
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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. Bocian said Ponderosa proposed to transfer the credits to the Busch property in <br />the event the School District does not build there. It did not have a particular developer in <br />mind. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky was concerned about the two for one. If there were a multi-family or <br />conversion, that is still within the Council's discretion. He asked if that was more of a <br />guideline? <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian said that was correct. Staff included that clause in order to provide some <br />kind of expectation for developers if they chose to transfer credits to a different unit type. If <br />Council wanted to leave that open, so it could determine any ratio at the time of review of <br />the request, that could be modified to reflect that. <br /> <br /> Ms. Hosterman felt the proposed guidelines had a great amount of flexibility for <br />Council. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky requested the language be changed a little regarding the two to one to <br />make it clearer it was a guideline. He did not want the words "generally to be applied". <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Ms. Hosterman, to adopt <br />Resolution No. 04-073, adopting the guidelines for inclusionary unit credits (IUC's) as <br />set forth in City Ordinance No. 1818 (Chapter 17.44 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code) <br />with the addition language in Section 5 as suggested by Mr. Brozosky. <br /> <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers - Ayala, Brozosky, Campbell, and Hosterman <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: Mayor Pico <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky referred to an item on the Consent Calendar regarding more expenses <br />for the fire station. He asked if there could be a comparison of the cost of producing this <br />energy efficiency and what the pay back time would be, since it is a demonstration project. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan said that was the plan. Staff was waiting to get the exact cost <br />amount at the end. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala asked if Council was interested in asking the Fair Board to have fireworks <br />again. It was determined the Fair Board Liaison Committee would address that issue. <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan indicated the Parks and Recreation Commission had requested staff <br />to address this. The Liaison Committee will await the Commissions review. <br /> <br />8. CLOSED SESSION <br /> <br /> Most closed session items were discussed prior to the meeting. Council adjourned <br />to a closed session at 9:35 p.m. to confer with the real property negotiator, Deborah <br />McKeehan, regarding the potential purchase of the property located at 4254 Vervais <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 18 09/21/04 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.