CCMIN091598 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mayor Tarver asked whether the City's position was stronger or weaker by including the parcels with the annexation application. Mr. Roush said if there is opposition to the Plan and the plan is driving the annexation, those property owners challenging the Specific Plan should not have the benefit of annexation. However, it makes no difference with regard to the lawsuit. Mayor Tarver declared the public hearing open. Frederik Jacobsen, PO Box 6190, San Mateo, representing the three property owners of Parcels 116, 119, and 124, submitted a letter concerning the position of the property owners on the annexation request. (See attached) The letter confirms previous communications with the City that these owners are requesting to be included in the annexation. His position is that the lawsuit has nothing to do with the annexation. The issues raised in the lawsuit have to do with density. He said the property owners of lot 124 are requesting annexation. He asked if staff could set forth the names of the lawyers that contacted the City with the position that the property owners support the annexation. Mr. Roush said Dean Harper and Larry Goldberg, from Walnut Creek. Ms. Michelotti asked if Mr. Jacobsen understood that the annexation includes the Specific Plan as it is outlined currently. Mr. Jacobsen clarified if she meant the density as outlined in the Specific Plan. Ms. Michelotti said yes and asked if he understood the annexation process. Mr. Jacobsen said he understood. What he is requesting is that these parcels be included in the annexation process. Don Temple, 6409 Alisal, was looking forward to the completion of the project. He said the issue regarding the cost of sewer and water has not been resolved. The staff report does not list allocations and how it is arrived at. People in the area have a concern that the City is telling them one thing and then doing something else. He asked if the City was still planning on putting the pathway along the west side of Alisal and include the east side as the annexed area. He did not want his property included. He would be happy to work with staff to make this a reality but he felt the City was going about it the wrong way. Ms. Ayala asked if his opinion was a consensus opinion for the area, and if so, why were the residents not here this evening? Mr. Temple said he has had many phone calls and talked to many residents. The general consensus is that the residents will support the annexation, but they are disappointed with the Pleasanton City Council Minutes 6 09/15/98