My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN021892
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
CCMIN021892
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:03 AM
Creation date
10/29/1999 10:03:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
90 <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Mohr, and seconded by Mr. Butler, that <br /> Resolution No. 92-42 be adopted, making application to the Alameda <br /> County Local Agency Formation Commission to expand the City's <br /> eastern Sphere-of-Influence to include an additional 300~ acres. <br /> <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Scribner, and Mayor Mercer <br /> NOES: Councilmember Tarver <br /> ABSENT: None <br /> ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> Item 6b <br /> Resolution MakinqApplication to LAFCO for Annexation 140, the Ruby <br /> Hill Project site <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer declared the public hearing open on the <br /> application. <br /> <br /> Peter MacDonald, 400 Main Street, represented property owners <br /> in the Gateway Area. He gave a letter to Council which states that <br /> the property owners support the proposed annexation of their <br /> properties with the following understanding: a) Nothing in the <br /> arrangement being worked out between Livemore and Alameda County <br /> requires that Pleasanton give up any land use jurisdiction over the <br /> Vineyard Avenue Transition Area as a condition to the annexation; <br /> b) the Revised South Livemore Valley Area Plan relabels the <br /> GatewayArea to a "TransitionalArea"; and c) the range of units in <br /> the County's Draft Plan is shown strictly to estimate possible <br /> agricultural mitigation fees and not as a restriction on <br /> Pleasanton's right to plan for the Vineyard Avenue Transition Area <br /> after its annexation. He concluded the Vineyard property owners <br /> would prefer the $5000 per unit fee to the $10,000 per cultivable <br /> acre fee. <br /> <br /> Michael Goodwin, who stated he was an owner of one of the <br /> properties, requested that his lot be removed from the list of <br /> property owners that were represented by Mr. MacDonald. <br /> <br /> Frank Berlogar, 2200 Vineyard Avenue, a property owner, shared <br /> his support of the annexation on the terms that Mr. MacDonald <br /> previously discussed. <br /> <br /> Sharon Heinz, a property owner, 1515 Vineyard Avenue, was in <br /> support of the annexation. <br /> <br /> Ken Chrisman, 1944 Vineyard Avenue, indicated that he was <br /> represented by Mr. MacDonald and was in agreement with the proposed <br /> annexation. <br /> <br /> James Tong, 6601 Owens Drive, owner of 2284 Vineyard Avenue, <br /> stated that he supported the annexation. <br /> <br /> 2/18/92 8 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.