CC Min 1995-02-27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Mayor Gasparini stated that the previous 1985 agreement would not drive the Council's decision. The Council had a second chance to have a better project than the 1985 agreement proposed, and it was clear the developer wanted this one, too. Mayor -- Gasparini suggested the Council review the three remaining disputed items, make a decision, and then let the developer decide. Mayor Gasparini summarized the ten items and Council's agreement on seven of the ten items (agreement with staffs recommendations as presented in City Attorney Schricker's letter of February 27, 1995 hand delivered.) The remaining three Items (6), (7) and (9) were discussed further. Item No.6. Director Patterson stated that the City Attorney recommended the clause "and the acceptance thereof not unreasonably withheld" be removed due to its ambiguity in that it implies the Council will accept improvements if offers are made. City Attorney Schricker advised that the substitute language is in the second letter dated February 27, 1995, but the major objection is the developer wants "which offers shall be promptly considered and not unreasonably withheld." City Attorney Schricker advised that it would have been preferable to specify what would be private and what would be public at the front end of the agreement, but both parties were too far down a different path to rewrite the agreement in that manner. CONSENSUS: Mayor Gasparini declared it was the consensus of the Council to accept the recommendation in City Attorney Schricker's letter of February 27, 1995, and reject the proposed revision. MINUTE ORDER NO. 95-043 Item No.7. Planning Director Patterson described the recommendation to reject the proposed revisions or alternatively, accept proposed revision, but delete the clause "and not unreasonably withheld" as described in Item No.7. CONSENSUS: Mayor Gasparini declared it was the consensus of the Council to accept the recommendation in City Attorney Schricker's letter of February 27, 1995, to leave the paragraph in and delete the last four words "and not unreasonably withheld." MINUTE ORDER NO. 95-044 Item No.9. City Manager Everett stated that traffic was such an important issue that the Council would accept a better alternative than the described shuttle service if one became available, but the Council should retain the discretion on this issue rather than give it over to an automatic formula. In response to Council questions, Planning Director Patterson described the justification for requiring shuttle service according to a fifty percent occupancy formula instead of the previously proposed "occupancy of 200,000 square feet", and City Manager Everett stated that this formula is fair to the developer and protects the City. MINUTE BOOK NO. 53 Regular Meeting Minutes Page No. 074 February 27, 1995 Page 9