My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
21 ATTACHMENT 3
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
072021
>
21 ATTACHMENT 3
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2021 2:13:11 PM
Creation date
7/15/2021 1:02:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
7/20/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
21
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2021\072021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
129
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
<br />73 <br />Measure M calls for an adoption of an Urban Limit Line in the city of Dublin and other <br />provisions that would change the Dublin General Plan for the Western Extended Planning Area, <br />located west of the current city limits. In general, Measure M would restrict annexation and <br />associated development west of Dublin city boundaries. No development has been projected in <br />the area west of the city of Dublin as part of the projections in this Official Statement. <br /> <br />Environmental Issues. As in many areas of the San Francisco Bay Area and the State <br />of California, residential and commercial development in the LAVWMA service area has been <br />constrained by state and federal laws and regulations that protect wetlands and endangered <br />species. Development proposals in the service area are already required to deal with issues <br />concerning endangered species, such as the California red-legged frog, the Alameda whipsnake <br />and the San Joaquin kit fox under both the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) and the California <br />Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The ESA determination is made on a case-by-case basis, <br />depending in part on whether the endangered species actually use or occupy the area to be <br />developed. Projects involving federal funding or a federal permit require consultation under the <br />ESA and may require mitigation of impacts on endangered species. While few development <br />projects have been stopped because of the ESA, some have incurred significant mitigation costs <br />and permitting delays, and the approved developments have sometimes been smaller than <br />originally proposed in order to minimize impacts. <br /> <br />On March 13, 2001, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“Service”) designated <br />approximately 4.1 million acres across 31 California counties as “critical habitat” for the California <br />red-legged frog (the designation became effective April 12, 2001). This designation includes much <br />of the undeveloped area of the city of Dublin. As a result of this critical habitat designation, some <br />future projects may undergo additional regulatory involvement by the Service. Also, under CEQA, <br />every development project must undergo environmental review. In that process, impacts to <br />“critical habitat” could be deemed to constitute an environmental impact requiring analysis and <br />mitigation. Thus, for some future projects, the designation of “critical habitat” may result in <br />additional environmental review and mitigation beyond that which would otherwise be performed. <br />LAVWMA cannot predict the ultimate effect of the critical habitat designation on development in <br />the Dublin area. <br /> <br />Other environmental issues impacting development in Dublin are likely to arise in the <br />future. LAVWMA and the Members cannot predict what environmental issues may arise and what <br />impact they may have on development. Dublin has assumed that environmental issues will not <br />stop the planned development in the table above. LAVWMA has in turn based its projections of <br />Regional Capacity Reserve Fees on planned development information provided by the city of <br />Dublin, as well as the Members. <br /> <br /> <br />CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON APPROPRIATIONS AND CHARGES <br /> <br />Article XIIIB <br /> <br />Article XIIIB of the California State Constitution limits the annual appropriations of the <br />State and of any city, county, school district, authority or other political subdivision of the State to <br />the level of appropriations of the particular governmental entity for the prior fiscal year, as adjusted <br />for changes in the cost of living and population. The “base year” for establishing such <br />appropriation limit is fiscal year 1978-79 and the limit is to be adjusted annually to reflect changes <br />in population and consumer prices. Adjustments in the appropriations limit of an entity may also <br />be made if (i) the financial responsibility for a service is transferred to another public entity or to a
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.