PC 072308 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Narum then inquired if it would be better to annex to the City if the City does not desire to build on this property. Ms. Decker confirmed that was correct. Commissioner Olson inquired if it would be correct to say that the City assumes the standard indemnification for this property. Ms. Harryman said yes. She added that this was one of the reasons the City wanted to annex the property as it was maintaining property that is outside the City limits. Commissioner Fox referred to Exhibit D and noted the triangular portion on the north and south ends which used to be accessible to the public. She inquired why the annexation does not include these areas. Ms. Decker replied that the City was working with Zone 7 for a Lot Line Adjustment to frame and carve out the triangular areas to be considered and acknowledged as the Martin Avenue Buffer Area. She noted, however, that the triangular areas have been left out and that she was not aware of the intent then as she was not part of those negotiations. She indicated that the Lot Line adjustment has already been recorded and no additional lands would be added to this area for consideration for annexation. Commissioner Fox referred to the License Agreement and inquired if there was a provision that during the 25-year term, the property would remain as open space and that there would be no structures and no Lake I maintenance road. Ms. Harryman replied that she worked on the License Agreement and that the language states that the purpose is for the City to be able to maintain and operate the site for park and recreation purposes and that the City cannot put in improvements or structures without receiving Zone 7 approval. She added that the City does have obligations for weed abatement and that there is no reference to a Lake I maintenance. She noted, however, that Zone 7 retains the ability to continue to use the property for water management purposes and that the pre-zoning was a way for the City to allow residents to continue to use the area as a passive open space while giving Zone 7 assurances regarding liability and maintenance issues. Commissioner Fox noted that some of the arroyos in Pleasanton include trails and use of trails and inquired why Zone 7, who she assumed owned the properties, has allowed that use in those areas. Ms. Harryman replied that this subject came up during negotiations and that Zone 7 has taken different approaches through the years. She stated that her impression is that Zone 7 is pushing back, and if the property will be maintained as open space, Zone 7 is trying to shift the maintenance and liability responsibilities as Zone 7 is in water management. She pointed out that there are cities that lend themselves well to recreational space, and it is finding that happy medium which is what the City has done. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 23, 2008 Page 15 of 25