Laserfiche WebLink
90 <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer replied that a letter from Mr. H. E. Ackermann of <br /> the Alameda County Department of Public Works Advanced Planning <br /> indicated that residents within the County Service Area (CSA) <br /> R-1967-1 had expressed some concerns about the agreement. Mr. <br /> Ackermann requested the postponement so he may have adequate time <br /> to look into those concerns. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes inquired if the City Attorney and the City <br /> Planner reviewed the document to assure that it is in compliance <br /> with Council action on the matter. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush replied that the document is in compliance. He <br /> stated that it was his understanding that the concerns brought to <br /> the County's attention late last week by someone within the <br /> Castlewood development area prompted the request for <br /> postponement. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated that the agreement includes all Council <br /> directives with respect to the project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes stated that since the agreement met the <br /> conditions approved by Council, he did not have a problem about <br /> discussing the matter during the meeting. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr inquired if there were more information from the <br /> County that the City has no access to at this point. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian answered that he did not think so. Mr. Ackermann <br /> indicated that a number of residents in the area contacted him and <br /> that he wanted some additional time to explain the implications of <br /> the agreement. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked Mr. Monsen what the ramifications of a two- <br /> week continuance would be for the project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Monsen replied that the project has gone through LAFCO <br /> and is currently undergoing annexation proceedings. It was <br /> initially before the County and later came to the City, and has <br /> received approval to record nine lots. He explained that he has <br /> been trying to get the maps to these lots recorded for the past <br /> seven months. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brandes inquired if the agreement would actually permit <br /> connection to and use of CSA R-1967-1. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift explained that by agreement, the nine lots would be <br /> serviced through the City of Pleasanton sewage capacity and the <br /> Dublin San Ramon Service District (DSRSD) Plant. The issue with <br /> the agreement is how to get the sewage from the Currin property to <br /> the DSRSD Plant. The CSA recently put a pipeline down Foothill <br /> Road to the Currin Property. The agreement allows the Currin <br /> property's nine lot sewage flow to go through the CSA's sewer <br /> pipeline to the pump station and through the City's sewer system <br /> to the DSRSD Plant. <br /> <br /> -2- <br /> 2-20-90 <br /> <br /> <br />