Laserfiche WebLink
or location, such as the Valley, is in a professionally run <br /> promotional campaign. The Plan calls for up to 10% of the Fund <br /> balance to be spent on promotional activities in any given year. <br /> Staff believes that such an effort would involve at least <br /> $100,000 per year in order to attract the level of investment and <br /> tourism which is needed to elevate the South Livermore Valley to <br /> anywhere near the level of recognition provided the other premier <br /> wine growing regions in California. <br /> <br /> Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs) <br /> <br />Although the use of TDRs was not included in the Concept Plan, <br />language was included which calls for further investigation of <br />the idea. Staff believes that-TDRs can work in specific <br />situations where the market for credits is strongly developed by <br />the value of development rights in appropriate receiving areas. <br />Staff does not believe that such a market exists within the Study <br />Area itself. On the other hand, a market may exist for credits <br />which could be transferred outside the Study Area. The San <br />Francisco property and the North Livermore area are good <br />examples. However, both Pleasanton and Livermore currently are <br />engaged in planning these two areas and a viable TDR system might <br />confuse the planning of holding capacities in these areas. In <br />addition, TDRs are notoriously complex to administer and may <br />require more effort to operate than they could deliver in value <br />to the Fertile Crescent. For these reasons, staff does not <br />recommend serious consideration of TDRs in this context. However, <br />the language contained in the Concept Plan does not commit the <br />City to do anything other than consider their use at a later <br />date. <br /> <br />FISCAL IMPACTS <br /> <br />The approval of the Plan Concept, in and of itself, would have no <br />fiscal impacts on the City. The Plan would be adopted and <br />administered by Alameda County and would not affect Pleasanton <br />unless land within the Plan Area were annexed. Fiscal costs and <br />revenues would depend on the level of development or extent of <br />agricultural use allowed on land annexed to Pleasanton. <br /> <br />ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT <br /> <br />Because Alameda County is the lead agency under CEQA, Pleasanton <br />does not need to prepare any environmental documentation <br />regarding this project. Alameda County will prepare an EIR which <br />discloses the full range of environmental effects resulting from <br />adoption of the Plan Concept. <br /> <br />SR:91:30 <br /> <br /> -11- <br /> <br /> <br />