CCMIN012301 - Laserfiche WebLink

Robert Cordtz, 262 W. Angela, congratulated the candidates and elected officials from the last election. Even though he was not elected, he indicated he would still be participating in community issues. Jennifer Hosterman, 2922 Chardonnay Drive, presented material to Council regarding the sustainable plan she discussed at the last Council meeting. She again explained the United Nations' definition of a sustainable plan as a society which meets the needs of the present without sacrificing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. She reiterated her request for formation of an environmental committee which would develop a sustainable plan for the City of Pleasanton. She reviewed the documents she had presented to Council and indicated citizens could get on the Internet at sustainable.org for more information. She also presented the energy policies for the cities of Santa Clara and Alameda. Chris Johnson, 3545 Vine Street, indicated discussions had taken place in May 1997 regarding annexation of the Remen Tract area. A survey was to be sent to the residents by City staff. The survey has not been done and the annexation process has stopped. Since that time, Alameda County has received an application for a lot line adjustment and variances for the setbacks. This would change density to one-quarter acre parcels and the residents feel this is too dense. He urged the Council to formally review the requests for variance. He also asked for a moratorium on new building in the area until the annexation is completed. Ms. McKeehan agreed the annexation process had begun, but had been relegated to a lower priority by the Council. Staff was finishing work on the Happy Valley area before moving to another annexation process. These take a lot of staff time. A moratorium would be easier to accomplish if the property were within the City limits and even then would require a four-fifths vote of the Council. All this will be discussed at the priorities workshop. Ms. Ayaia asked if the City could comment on the County review of the lot line adjustments. She also encourages Mr. Johnson to contact Mike Faber. Mr. Roush indicated staff had provided comments. There were three existing lots of record. When Council approved the preannexation agreement for this particular parcel, it was conditioned that the property could not be further subdivided. This is not a subdivision, it is merely a lot line adjustment to equalize the size of the three lots. Mr. Swift further clarified that those three lots are smaller than what had been discussed with regard to parcels in the Remen Tract, however because they were pre- existing lots of record, a house would have been allowed to be built on each of them. The issue is not whether three houses are built, it is what is the size of the lots. The lot line adjustment simply makes the biggest lot smaller. Pleasanton City Council 5 01/23/01 Minutes