CCMIN021892 - Laserfiche WebLink

86 (3) expand the Pleasanton Sphere of Influence to include the entire 1,603 acres described above; and (4) initiate a General Plan study for the 368 acre Vineyard Avenue Corridor area (after the City's application to LAFCO to annex this area into the City of Pleasanton); Also consider adoption of a Negative Declaration. Mr. Mercer declared the public hearing open on the application. Kathy Brown, Mayor of Livermore, explained that the City of Livermore had been negotiating with Signature Properties and the County of Alameda for the last six months. She stated that when the County approved the Ruby Hill project, the City of Livermore filed a lawsuit against the County because it did not agree with the precedent of urban development in unincorporated areas. Livermore was also concerned with allowing stand alone sewer treatment plants in the unincorporated areas, felt that the Tiger Salamander and Habitat Plan was insufficient, and were concerned about traffic mitigation measures. Ms. Brown stated that City of Livermore proposes an extension of Highway 84 such that all properties west of the highway be annexed to the City of Pleasanton and the properties east of the highway be annexed to City of Livermore. (She referred to an overhead projection map) The County has agreed to promote a revised South Livermore Plan Program .which would add to the preservation and enhancement of the South Livermore 'Valley by creating a Mitigation Fund and Acreage Plan that the City would commit to. Signature Properties has committed 1.7 million dollars to complete the connection of the re-routed Highway 84. She further stated that Signature Properties has also committed five million dollars to Livermore's reverse osmosis demonstration project to enable Livermore to provide sewer service for Ruby Hill. She indicated that the Tiger Salamander issue had not been totally resolved but an improved habitat plan was forthcoming. She believed the recharge of ground water and recycled water for agriculture purposes was important. Ms. Brown concluded by requesting that the General Plan, prezoning and the annexation of the property all reflect a modified annexation boundary. She requested that the City of Pleasanton's tentative conditions reflect the sewer service issue and the traffic mitigation plan. Ms. Brown felt that this verbal settlement was in the best interest of both cities, the County, and Signature Properties.