Laserfiche WebLink
owner of 4230 Vervais Avenue that it wishes to sell its property, Council would respond in an <br />appropriate manner, if Council wanted to pursue the Main Street Green concept, star{ could <br />pursue this without the acquisition of 4230 Vervais Avenue. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky pointed out that 4230 Vervais Avenue has been redesignated Park in the <br />General Plan and the Downtown Specific Plan. He believed this was the same issue with 4254 <br />Vervais Avenue, as the Duclairs could not sell their property because of the zoning change. He <br />believed the City may be setting a precedent by purchasing 4254 Vervais Avenue as this <br />property is designed Park. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian said staff informed the Duclairs that if they wanted to pursue a General Plan <br />amendment the process could be discussed with the Planning Department, which would <br />ultimately have been presented to the Council. <br /> <br /> Mr. Fialho said the estimated cost improvements for the Main Street Green Plaza was <br />quoted at several hundred thousand dollars, which he viewed as interim improvements. If the <br />direction were to build this site out to what is envisioned in the Downtown Specific Plan, the cost <br />would escalate. The City might be setting a precedent by pumhasing 4254 Vervais Avenue, but <br />if it is Council's wish, it could direct staff to go through the process of amending the General <br />Plan for the property at 4230 Vervais Avenue, or it could maintain as much flexibility as possible <br />and see how it plays out. In the future if the property at 4230 Vervais Avenue is available to <br />purchase, Council may decide to purchase it or redesignate it. <br /> <br /> Michael Roush, City Attorney, said the use for the property at 4230 Vervais Avenue <br />could continue as a legal nonconforming use in the same way as the property at 4254 Vervais <br />Avenue. <br /> <br /> Ms. McGovern asked what was the closest park available to children in the South <br /> Pleasanton neighborhood. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian said the closest park available to children in the South Pleasanton <br /> neighborhood was Mission Hills Park. <br /> <br /> Ms. McGovern asked if a specific plan was available that required a specific number of <br /> residential homes before a five-acre park was built. <br /> <br /> Mr. Fialho did not believe there was a threshold in terms of density. The General Plan <br /> typically identifies where neighborhood and community parks are to be located. <br /> <br /> In response to an inquiry by Ms. McGovern, Mr. Fialho said there are other <br /> developments that are being discussed for the Happy Valley area. For other areas in town, the <br /> City has asked the developers to dedicate land and/or improve a park as part of the housing <br /> development. In the Bridle Creek area, part of the condition was not to build a park and provide <br /> trail access to Mission Hills Park so that it could provide the open space park feeling for that <br /> particular neighborhood. <br /> <br /> Ms. McGovern asked if the City still had avenues to ensure that some type of <br /> neighborhood park was available for children in South Pleasanton if Council authorized a <br /> transfer of post 1998 In Lieu Park Dedication fees from the South Pleasanton Park Site <br /> Acquisition Reserve CIP project for the purchase of 4254 Vervais Avenue? <br /> <br /> Mr. Fialho said in lieu of paying Park Dedication fees, a developer has the option of <br /> building a park improvement to benefit the general area and the development itself. <br /> <br /> Pleasanton City Council 21 05/17/05 <br /> Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />