My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN071090
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
CCMIN071090
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:34 AM
Creation date
10/29/1999 11:51:41 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.
/
28
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
321 <br /> <br />marketing situation considerably. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer explained that the law prohibits the City Council <br />from taking any actions on an item without 72-hour notice to the <br />public. He requested staff to schedule the item on an upcoming <br />Agenda, and Council can consider the matter then. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes recommended that removing real estate signs be <br />considered as another alternative in the discussion. <br /> <br />6. PUBLIC HEARINGS <br /> Item 6a and item 9a were considered together. <br /> <br />Item 6a <br />Application of the City of Pleasanton for Sphere-of-Influence, <br />Annexation, and Prezoning for up to 11,500 Acres Generally Located <br />West of Foothill Road, South of 1-580, East of the Hayward Sphere- <br />of-Influence, and North of the East Bay Regional Park District's <br />Ridgelands Park <br /> <br />Item 9a <br />Report on Ridgelands Citizen Committee Scope of Work, Composition, <br />and Procedures <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift presented his reports (SR 90:271 and SR 90:273) <br />regarding the matters. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that Council would have an initial <br />discussion on the matter before opening the public hearing in order <br />to narrow down some of the issues and to have the public hearing in <br />an expeditious manner. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler stated that the Steering Committee recommended the <br />extension of Pleasanton's sphere-of-influence to the modified <br />Palomares line, which goes along the top of the western ridge <br />without including the Palomares Canyon. He added that the <br />Committee is not recommending annexation at this time; the <br />Committee was concerned about the Council's intent to go beyond the <br />Palomares Canyon. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver commented that the City did not need any control <br /> over property beyond the Eden Township line. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that the issue on the Ridge was raised over <br /> a year ago when the City of Livermore requested LAFCO to review its <br /> sphere of influence and move its limits closer to Pleasanton's <br /> sphere-of-influence. As a result, the Pleasanton City Council <br /> decided to study its entire sphere-of-influence. He indicated that <br /> his position was to extend the sphere-of-influence only to that <br /> <br /> 7-10-90 <br /> - 5 - <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.