CCMIN052097 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Swift said he believed this policy was already in the General Plan, but would check and advise Mr. Erickson. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS Item 6a Discussion of Potential Annexation of the Remen Tract. and Policy Regarding Sewer Connections in Unincorporated Area (SR97: 136) Councilmember Pico stepped down from the dias due to a conflict of interest. (lie has a client with a financial interest in this matter.) Randall Lum presented the staff report. Ms. Dennis reviewed a list of required improvements and the costs as stated in the May 31, 1985 letter. She asked if all the listed improvements were necessary in order for the annexation to occur or could partial improvements be done, in order to preserve the rural character. Mr. Lum said there needs to be some review as to the level of improvements that would be required if the annexation were to occur. Staff at the very minimum would recommend that the streets be upgraded to provide access for emergency vehicles. Ms. Michelotti asked if some of the specifications could be done through a specific plan process? Mr. Lum said yes. Mayor Tarver said none of the existing pre-annexation agreements commit the property owners to pay for upgrades. He asked if the City provided services to these parcels, what would be the likelihood these parcels would want to be annexed? Mr. Lum said this was a concern. Once properties were connected to City sewer and water, it would diminish the motivation to proceed with annexation. Ms. Ayala asked if the two houses were to be developed would it diminish the opposition for annexation. Mr. Lum said the Remen Tract residents have been concerned about the density on vacant parcels and if single family homes were developed it would take away some opposition. Mayor Tarvet said three issues have been brought up: 1) the cost of the improvements; 2) the connection of the road for emergency services; and 3) the density of the development. Pleasanton City Council 05/20/97 Minutes 6