Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON <br /> <br />ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFOP~IA <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. 83-95 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF FREDERIC <br />AND JENNIFER LIN FOR CANCELLATION OF WILLIAMSON <br />ACT AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE CONTRACT 1971-73 UNDER <br />THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA GOVE~ENT CODE SECTION <br />51282.1 REMOVING 230 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE <br />SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF PICO AVENUE <br /> <br />WHEREAS , <br /> <br />the City is in receipt of an application from <br />Frederic and Jennifer Lin for cancellation of <br />Williamson Act Agricultural Preserve Contract <br />1971-73 under the provisions o.~alifornia Govern- <br />ment Code Section 51282'.1 to allow development of <br />the side for residential use consistent with City <br />General Plan policies; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS <br /> <br />on April 27, 1982, Council adopted Resolution No. <br />82-146 setting forth the Williamson Act rules and <br />procedures for the City of Pleasanton; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS <br /> <br />based on the Initial Environmental Study indicating <br />no significant adverse effects on the environment, <br />a negative declaration was adopted by Council on <br />March 8, 1983; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS <br /> <br />in accordance with state and local requirements, <br />a duly noticed public hearing was held on March <br />1983; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS <br /> <br />Council received the City staff's report and <br />recommendation for approval of the proposed can- <br />cellation of the Williamson Act contract together <br />with facts providing the bases for making the <br />findings required by law; <br /> <br />NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON <br />RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: <br /> <br />Section 1: The City Council makes the following findings: <br /> <br />That the cancellation of the Williamson Act <br />Agricultural Preserve Contract 1971-73 and <br />the development of the alternative use proposed <br />will not result in discontiguous patterns of <br />urban development because the property is <br />adjacent to and is a logical extension of <br />existing urban development similar to that <br />proposed, as more fully documented in the <br />public record of this project approval. <br /> <br />-1- <br /> <br /> <br />