My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN041790
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
CCMIN041790
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:34 AM
Creation date
11/3/1999 10:20:07 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.
/
26
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
191 <br /> <br />Item 6c <br />Resolution Making Application to LAFCO for Annexation No. 137 <br />(Staples Ranch, 27.5 Acres) <br /> <br /> Mr. Elliott presented his report (SR 90:152) regarding the <br />matter. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer declared the public hearing open on the <br />application. <br /> <br /> Mr. Don Little, 3305 Hudson Court, inquired what the Local <br />Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) process is, what kind of <br />housing, school and specific plans the project has, and what would <br />happen after the project is developed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that LAFCO is a separate agency that looks <br />at changing County or City limit lines. In this case, both the <br />County and the City are requesting LAFCO to permit the annexation <br />of property belonging to the County into the City's limits. It <br />takes LAFCO three to six months to process the application, and <br />the request, if approved, returns back to Council for final <br />decision. The owner then proceeds with the City's development <br />plan process, during which time public hearings are held and the <br />Design Review Board (DRB), the Planning Commission, and the City <br />Council look into project issues including design criteria, types <br />of houses, schools, and road configurations. <br /> <br /> Mr. Little asked why the County is requesting the annexation <br />of only the residential area instead of the entire parcel. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr stated that she wanted to ask staff the same <br />question. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer referred the question to Mr. Swift. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift replied that after some preliminary discussion, the <br />County decided to begin processing the residential portion in <br />order to sell the property to a developer. The County intends to <br />develop the balance of the site as a joint project with a <br />development partner and intends to discuss the whole process with <br />the City. This process will include all the major public <br />infrastructure on E1 Charro Road. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr inquired why annexing the entire property at this <br />time would affect that process. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift answered that when the County begins consideration <br />on the development of the rest of the property, it would like to <br />discuss with the City issues such as the relative shares of <br />property taxes, etc. <br /> <br /> - 5 - <br /> 4-17-90 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.