My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
08
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
022117
>
08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/29/2017 12:59:53 PM
Creation date
2/16/2017 12:03:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
2/21/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
08
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
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
be constructed. If Council chooses to lift the interim policy of not accepting applications, <br />it is recommended that the 2002 policy be amended to also require all future connections <br />to include payment of the cost to construct the utility extensions assuming they will be <br />constructed at some time in the future. Depending on City Council's direction, staff could <br />bring back a suggested 2002 policy amendment at a future meeting. Staff proposes a <br />decision on changing the interim policy be deferred until discussions with the County of <br />Alameda and LAFCo progress further. <br />Potential Annexation of the Happy Valley Area <br />As Council recalls, there was a vote in 2002 by the unincorporated Happy Valley Area <br />residents regarding annexation. That vote failed and the area remains unincorporated. <br />However, during the process of working on the study and preparing this report, staff has <br />heard questions regarding whether the unincorporated Happy Valley Area would again <br />be considered for annexation. Staff has not addressed that question and the RMC study <br />and this report focuses only on water and sewer infrastructure extensions into the <br />unincorporated Happy Valley area. All costs to provide water and sewer to the area as <br />presented assume the area remains unincorporated and services are provided through <br />OSA agreements. Further, the cost to provide water and sewer to each property does <br />not represent the potential total cost of annexation of the area. There are several other <br />costs that Council may also wish to study if it is decided to pursue annexation of the area. <br />For example, currently the streets are relatively unimproved, and for the most part do not <br />include curb, gutter, sidewalks, storm drainage facilities, ADA accommodations, street <br />lighting, etc. If the Council decides to pursue annexation, it is recommended that potential <br />costs such as these be evaluated as well. In other words, a holistic approach to <br />annexation would be necessary and not just a study of water and sewer infrastructure <br />improvements as discussed in this report. <br />Submitted by: - <br />Stephe irkpatrick <br />Director of Engineering <br />Fiscal Review: <br />Al (/ <br />Tina Olson <br />Director of Finance <br />Approved by: <br />Nelson Fialho <br />City Manager <br />Attachments: <br />1. RMC Happy Valley Water and Sewer Study <br />2. Relevant sections of City of Pleasanton Fee Schedule <br />Page 7 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.