CCMIN072099 - Laserfiche WebLink

The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers - Ayala, Michelotti, Pico, and Mayor Tarver NOES: None ABSENT: Councilmember Dennis ABSTAIN: None Item 6a Happy Valley Annexation (SR 99:217) Mayor Tarver indicated this item would be continued for decision on July 29, 1999; however those people who cannot attend that meeting may make comments tonight. Mayor Tarver declared the public hearing open. Tom Smith, 1070 Happy Valley Road, indicated he supported the project and wanted the golf course. However, he stated the bypass road must be completed first. He is becoming more concerned about this because of comments from property owners, the CAPP initiative, concems about the EIR, and other issues. He wanted to know if the road can be built first or can the City guarantee it will be built within a reasonable period of time. Can those answers be given before the vote on annexation? Bruce Brogden, 6245 Alisal Street, also supported the bypass road. He related his calculations of the number of trips to the golf course and the 34 new homes. If you combine the trips from the current houses and the additional trips to the golf course and new houses, that would be about one car every 9.3 seconds during peak hours. That is triple what is there today. He did not think the additional traffic was worth having a golf course in the area. Even if the sewer and water were free, it would not override his desire to have the bypass road. The bypass road must be operational before one round of golf is played. He would not vote for annexation without the road. He asked Council to help the residents maintain the country atmosphere in this area. People from all around use the area for walks and bicycle rides. Bill Howell, 6651 Alisal Street, believed there was a lot of confusion and concern among the residents on the costs associated with annexation. The Board of the Alisal Improvement Club feels that there should be an election to decide on annexation, so the community will be asked, instead of told, whether it will be annexed. That was its purpose in urging the protest votes. He presented his summary of the votes submitted so far. He expressed some concern about the technicalities of the forms submitted and wanted to make sure votes were not disqualified. Ms. Acosta indicated staff had done another mailing to clarify that a signature was needed on the protest letters. Ms. Michelotti asked for staff to explain the annexation process. Pleasanton City Council 7 07/20/99