Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFuture of Tri-Valley Joint Planning Commission Mtgs CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT Planning Commission Meeting Date: October 5, 1987 SUBJECT: Future of Tri-Valley Joint Planning Commission Meetings EXHIBITS ATTACHED: None RECOMMENDATION: ~ Define interest for future joint meetings. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The joint meetings have had negligible fiscal effects on the City. The fiscal effect of future meetings has not been determined. DESCRIPTIOI~ : At the last Tri-Valley Joint Planning Commission meeting in Livermore, a consensus was reached to agendize the future of the joint meetings on the next available individual Planning Commission meeting. Robert Brown, Livermore Planning Director, offered to tabulate the results of the individual Planning Commissions and, if appropriate, to develop a schedule for future meetings. A key question regarding the future of the joint meetings is its purpose and intent. The original intent of the joint meetings was to act as a forum for Planning Commissioners and Staffs from the Tri-Valley area to: 1 - Establish direct, informal lines of communication with individual counterparts in other jurisdictions. 2 - Informally exchange ideas, concerns, and comments on matters of mutual interest. Between 1983 and 1986, various joint meetings were held with informal discussion topics ranging from individual planning studies to areawide air quality maintenance. In 1986, the direction of the joint meetings changed somewhat with a request from Alameda County for the Commissioners to review the structure of an advisory committee to serve Alameda County in its Current Plan review. The result was a formalized Tri-Valley Technical Advisory Committee that held meetings for over a year reviewing the policies and plans of the Tri-Valley jurisdictions. The Committee ultimately prepared a report with policy recommendations on area planning issues. In this situation, the joint meeting took on a third role: 3 To provide policy review and policy recommendations. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission define its intent for the joint meetings. The Planning Commission should indicate whether the joint meetings should (1) maintain their original intent, (2) include the additional role, (3) take a different role, or (4) be discontinued. ITEM NO. 9.1 COPIES TO: