CCMIN040505 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Brozosky reported that he had a discussion with Mr. Fialho regarding this issue. In the future, if Council adds conditions or changes to the process and staff realizes this will add additional costs to the project, he would like staff to inform Council about the possible impacts. Mayor Hosterman invited public comments. Cy Matin, a Pleasanton resident, believed that the winning design from the design competition gives the perception to the community that this is the preferred design. Mayor Hoserman closed the public comments. When Mr. Rasmussen makes presentations to the various Commissions, Ms. McGovern asked if the Commissions are informed that the Council has not approved the winning design and it is a work in progress? Mr. Rasmussen said he explains the process and the purpose of the evening's meeting and the subsequent meetings that would be held in the future. Ms. McGovem pointed out that she continually hears 318 buildable acres that are available for the Bernal property. She noted that there is not 318 buildable acres on this property. She wondered if this information is being made clear the community. She asked Mr. Rasmussen to make it clear to the community at the April 11 Town Hall meeting that there are not 318 buildable acres on the Bernal property. She asked Mr. Rasmussen to be specific as to how many acres are buildable. Mr. Rasmussen said he would make this clarification. Mayor Hosterman noted that there is a distinction to be made between buildable and useable. When referring to usable acres, there is 318-acres. Mr. Rasmussen said he would clarify where development could take place versus the natural areas where development could not. In response to an inquiry by Mr. Brozosky, Mr. Rasmussen said that none of the five site plan alternatives for the design competition won as originally submitted. M.D. Fotheringham originally had the cultural arts center located in the middle of Valley Avenue and then it was moved to the Bernal Open Space area, in the opposite direction of what the jury had suggested. At each of the Commission meetings, he explained the purpose of the meeting and the process. He very clearly indicated at all of the meetings, that staff did not have a preferred plan, and community input was encouraged. At these meetings, Mr. Fotheringham reviewed the list of pros and cons listed in the staff report that Council received at the beginning of the year. The emphasis at these meetings was placed on the cultural arts center, which is how he believed the message of preference came through. When the Commissioners asked Mr. Fotheringham what he thought the best solution was, he said Valley Avenue. He made it clear that from the beginning, staff has stated that there is no staff preference and staff encourages and wants community input. Mr. Sullivan asked if the five site plan alternatives for the 318-acre City-owned portion of the Bernal property have gone through the various Commissions, and if the five site plan alternatives would be presented at the Town Hall meeting unchanged. Mr. Rasmussen said the five site plan alternatives and two alternatives for the future Bernal Community Park have been presented to the various Commissions and will be presented at the Town Hall meeting without any revisions. Pleasanton City Council 24 04/05/05 Minutes