Laserfiche WebLink
7, MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL <br /> <br />Item 7a <br />On-gOing ~li~!~iOn$ regarding San Francisco Property and Cooperative Planning Process <br />for the San Francisco Water Department - Bernal Avenue Site <br /> <br />Item 7a(1)S~n FranCiSCo Bernal Property Timeline (IR96:49) <br /> <br /> Brian Swift presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver requested a closed session on this matter before the Board of Supervisors <br />meeting on July 25. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush indicated a tolling agreement is being drafted along the lines adopted as to <br />the Berrenda Mesa EIR, with the intent that the Board would certify the EIR, approve the <br />Specific Plan, and then there would be a three-party agreement between Pleasanton/Alameda <br />County/San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, concerning Pleasanton's agreement not to <br />challenge the approvals for a period of time in order to continue negotiations. That would take <br />Council approval. If that does not happen, then there is a thirty day window to file an action <br />challenging the EIR. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked for clarification that the tolling agreement would not waive <br />Pleasanton's right to challenge if negotiations were not successful. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush agreed. The intent is not to waive any rights, but to defer filing of any <br />lawsuits if the negotiations are not successful. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver indicated Council has consisten~y stated its position that it did not want San <br />Francisco to seek County approval. The Planning Commission voted to approve the San <br />Francisco application. He cited examples of development in the County: Happy Valley, <br />Castlewood and other county approved developments that ultimately became a burden to the City <br />of Pleasanton or other cities. If the County continues on its course of land use control and <br />urbanization in the County, we are lost. We have fought for city-centered growth. He was <br />adamantly opposed to the tolling agreement. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti pointed out that an agreement was signed at the beginning that recognized <br />that the City of San Francisco would proceed with its application to Alameda County at the same <br />time it was negotiating with Pleasanton. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver said Alameda County is obligated by law to process the application; it is not <br />required by law to approve the application. <br /> <br />07/16/96 -30- <br /> <br /> <br />