Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Roush noted that when staff conducted an appraisal of agricultural land <br />several years ago, it was around 70 cents per square foot. Based on the 70 cents per <br />square foot and the total number of acres, he believed it would cost in the range of <br />$350,000 to $400,000 just to acquire an easement for the GE property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sullivan clarified that he was asking for the costs that would be associated to <br />purchase the land from GE property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said that from the property owners' point of view, whether the City is <br />acquiring an easement or a fee take, GE would not be able to utilize this land. <br /> <br /> In response to an inquiry by Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Wilson said the property owned by <br />GE is currently being used for cattle grazing. From an operational end, he pointed out <br />that there is one additional small cost, which is associated with reorienting the golf <br />course on that portion of the driving range that is not fenced. The reason for the fencing <br />is to protect the parking lot and to keep the golf balls off of GE's property, which makes it <br />easier to retrieve the balls. <br /> <br /> Ms. McGovern asked how many lots are located next to the driving range. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wilson said that in the smaller quadrant, there are seven lots. In addition, <br />there are three or four lots that are located next to the driving range itself. <br /> <br /> Ms. McGovern asked if any of these lots have been sold? <br /> <br /> Mr. Wilson said he did not know. <br /> <br /> Ms. McGovern wondered if the developers of the residential lots near the driving <br />range would be interested in contributing towards the costs associated with reorienting <br />the golf course driving range. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush mentioned that he had a conversation with one of the developer's <br />attorneys about this proposition and whether or not the developer would be willing to <br />contribute towards the design costs. There was some indication that the developer <br />would, but the conversation occurred several months ago and he has not heard anything <br />further. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky asked what would be the process to condemn this property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said staff would try to negotiate something with GE. He was not <br />certain that there would be resistance, or if the City would have to formally condemn the <br />property. If staff could not reach an agreement with GE about the price, the City would <br />have to go through condemnation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky asked if the GE property is located in the County or in the City <br />limits? <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said that the GE property is located in an unincorporated area of the <br />city. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 18 03/15/05 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />