CCMIN052780 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Wood stated he had voted against the annexation and was still opposed to it as he felt there was an.obligation to those within the City to provide services before annexing more land. Mr. Bud Barlow, 6723 Alisal Street, representing Alisal Homeowners Association, stated that LAFCO had not advised this group of the hearing on this matter, there- fore no one had appeared to oppose the annexation. He stated the residents were concerned about the size of lots being 1/2 acre and felt they should be 1 acre lots, and they felt the road. should be included in the annexation. He stated they felt there should be another access road provided to Sunol/Pleasanton Boulevard from the proposed annexation and requested this be made a condition of the annexation. Dr. Dennis Clarkides, 737 Happy Valley Road, stated' he objected to the annexa- tion because it will increase traffic on Happy Valley Road which is narrow and has a dangerous railroad tunnel. He also stated he felt an Environmental Impact Report should be required as there had been serious flooding in this area recently, and that the annexation will have an adverse impact on the environment. .Mr. Ted Fairfield, Civil Engineer representing Mr. Pestana, stated the developer is aware that annexation of this property brings no assurances of municipal services from the City. He stated he felt it would be inappropriate to change the zoning at this time. Mr. Fairfield advised that LAFCO did not annex Happy Valley Road because it is an area-wide responsibility and should not be the direct responsibility of the City. He stated that an Environmental Assessment had been prepared and that the flooding problem will be taken care of. Mr. Fairfield advised that access to the property will continue to be reviewed. He stated he thought this annexation process was formally in the final stages and should not be a matter for discussion at this time. Mayor Mercer explained this itemwas being discussed now as a courtesy to Councilmember Mohr since she was not a member of Council at the time the matter was initiated. The City Attorney advised that under existing annexation laws this is a per- functory action. He stated that if the City does not take the necessary action then LAFCO may require the County Board of Supervisors to cause annexation to be completed. It was moved by Councilmember Kephart, and seconded by Councilmember Butler,- that Resolution No. 80-142, orderiag the annexation of Annexation No. 7F - Pestana, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYE'S': ..... c0uncilmembers Butler, Kephart, Mohr, and Mayor Mercer NOES: Councilmember Wood ABSENT: None ~yor Mercer recessed the meeting at 10:10 P.M. Mayor Mercer reconvened the meeting at 10:15 P.M. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Recommendations and Ranking by Human Services CommiSsion of CETA Title VI Proposals for Fiscal Year 1981 Mrs. Bengtson presented her report dated May 14, 1980, regarding this matter. She stated it was very uncertain at this time as to the amount of funding that will be received for CETA Title VI programs. s. ~/2z/so