CCMIN091905 - Laserfiche WebLink

contract. He anticipated issuance of the bonds and construction to begin in January 2006. Mr. Sullivan asked when Pleasanton Council would conduct its PUD review process? Mr. Iserson said the process would not include a separate PUD approval as this is not a PUD application or area, and Council's action this evening would be related to the site plan and building elevations as presented this evening. He noted there would be another meeting regarding the financing plan. BART as a governmental agency is not obligated to gain approvals of any city and it is working closely with both cities for its input and Council's recommendation. BART has requested an expedited process and this is how it is being handled. Ms. McGovern found it hard to approve Scheme B of the BART station and the proposed design of the parking structure without the financial plan. She asked when the financial discussion would occur? Mr. Fialho said he and Mr. Ambrose, Dublin City Manager, agreed they would hold the financial discussion individually with each of its respective City Councils. He planned to present the financing issues to Pleasanton Council on October 4. Mr. Brozosky reminded both Councils that it needed to provide a recommendation to support Scheme B of the BART station and the proposed design of the parking structure. Mr. Ambrose said there would be a time when BART would present a financing agreement to both cities and the County of Alameda for consideration, and what Mr. Fialho referred to is more of an informational report in terms of what the proposed commitment from the two cities is. BART is actually putting an agreement together that would formalize that commitment. Ms. McGovern asked if both Councils could approve Scheme B based upon the future approval of the financing plan. Mr. Ambrose said it was his understanding the funding that is being requested of the two cities and Alameda County is requisite for moving the project forward and relates to providing additional reserve funds for debt service in the future. He pointed out there is an existing current MOU with BART that both cities of Dublin and Pleasanton entered into with BART specifying what type of financial commitment would be made. BART is proposing a change to the way in which this commitment was made. It was his understanding that Mr. Fialho would present this change to the Pleasanton Council at its October 4 meeting and Dublin Council would be discussing this change at its September 20 meeting. Both cities would not take any final action until the final details were spelled out in an agreement between BART and the Cities of Dublin and Pleasanton. Joint PleasantonlDublin City Council 8 09/19/05 Minutes