My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12a
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2016
>
021616
>
12a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/11/2016 4:12:48 PM
Creation date
2/10/2016 3:56:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
2/16/2016
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
12a
Document Relationships
12b
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2016\021616
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
tank abandonment are additional costs. The Alisal Street lots are covered by this fee <br /> structure. On Sycamore Road, the "laterals only" cost is estimated to be about $2,000, with <br /> connection fees and on-site laterals additional. <br /> City review for conformity with City policy has been added as a requirement in the last few <br /> out-of-City utility agreements. This has been limited to design review of new additions and <br /> houses. While conceptually possible to concurrently review a subdivision in the City and <br /> County, it is not practical and would not be supported by staff. The County's submittal <br /> requirements are quite different, the process (Planning Commission-City Council review in the <br /> City) is not as straightforward as simple design review, and many more policy-related issues <br /> are addressed. Staff believes those wishing to subdivide should annex to Pleasanton and be <br /> subject to normal City reviews before receiving utility connections to newly created lots. Staff <br /> cannot be sure that a County subdivision meets all City development standards without the full <br /> City discretionary review process. <br /> Of the four options, the first is the historical, more restrictive policy. In the Remen Tract, the <br /> City has moved, through a number of circumstances not all present here, to the Option 3 <br /> policy. While most requests in the Happy Valley general area have had the Option 1 test <br /> applied, the City has followed Option 2 when the request has been to expand a house and the <br /> County Health Department has required connection to utilities for the expansion. Staff cannot <br /> recall the City following the Option 4 policy at any time. <br /> If allowed by the City, it is likely that more than ten sanitary sewer connections will be <br /> requested in the Happy Valley area. Based on the LAVWMA agreement discussed earlier, the <br /> City must obtain LAVWMA concurrence when the aggregate number of sewer connections in <br /> the area exceeds ten. <br /> CONCLUSION <br /> The policy of denying utilities to new development outside the City is a reasonable approach <br /> to controlling County development adjacent to our boundaries and is consistent with General <br /> Plan policies. The exceptions to this policy have been few, have been limited to "infill" sites <br /> where City infrastructure has essentially been present, and have been conditioned to meet City <br /> land use policies and standards. These circumstances are basically present along Sycamore <br /> Road and will be along Alisal Street. Extending the strict policy to a class or two of projects <br /> on existing lots within these narrowly proscribed areas (those with laterals installed for <br /> eventual connections) can be consistent with the Happy Valley Specific Plan and past City <br /> policy in somewhat similarly situated circumstances in the Remen Tract is these connections <br /> SR:02:284 <br /> Revises SR 02:276 11/19/02 Page 9 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.