Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0476.091~:'.'i ... '. o , . '. !.", ,." October 24, 1991 Honorable City CO'o.lrlcil Palo Alto, Califor~ia Members of the council: Last spring COl.lncil "\oIithdrew n froQ negotiations ,.,dth Ms. Bressler regarding ti".'::: trade of her property for a portion ot the city-o'wmed 77 acres on Arastradero -Road. At the time, Council instructed staff to do no furth~r ~ork en the subj~ct, unless Ms~ Bressler (or some other party) car.:e for .. 'ard .:i th a ne'.w' proposal. Such a proposal has noW' been made. The number of proposed lots, the location of the property to be traded, and th<a access to tr.e building sites are completely different from anything ~e have seen before. In discussiens with Ms. Bressler's representatives, we have urqed them to take a slightly different approach in presenting their proposal. Rather than prepare detailed plans fvr staff review r we have asked the~ to prepare a conceptual program for presentation to the city Council in a study session. In this .... ay, Council and the. public can learn the broad outline of the proposal; and council can indicate ~hether or not staff and Ms. Bressler should pursue the matter. If this ne~ proposal is not acceptable to Council at the conceptual level, there is little sense in spending valuable time and resources to develop details. rn order to accolnpJ ish this \olE: have scheduled a study session following the meeting of October 2El. ~:s. Bressler's r~present­ atives -will make a presentat.ion at that time explaining their proposal publicly. Council ..... i11 have the opportunity to ask questions ar.d generally com:;nent on the concept. E""II'en though no formal action by COUncil is permitted during the study ses6ion, the comments and questions fr~m the Cou~cil should help Ms. Bressler determine if she wishes to continue " .. ith this effort+ Respectfully submitted, ( W LLIA.."1: ZANER C ty Manager CMR:476: 91 • "