PC 07/16/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

The project is comprised of a number of land use approvals which together make up the project, as follows: Approval of the Bemal Property Specific Plan for the 51 O-acre site to allow development of up to 1,900 residential units, up to 755,000 square feet of commercial/office space, an 18-hole golf course, parks, an elementary school, and associated uses. Approval of corresponding zoning actions as follows: Prezone the 439.7 acres of the Bemal Property in unincorporated Alameda County to Pleasanton's Planned Unit Development (PUD) District Rezone the approximately 70.3 acres of the Bemal Property already within the jurisdiction of the City of Pleasanton from I-P (Industrial Park) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) District. Rezone the one-acre parcel owned by the City of Pleasanton from I-P (Industrial Park) to P (Public and Institutional). Prezone the portion of the Alameda County Transportation Corridor to Planned Unit Development (PUD) - Transportation Corridor. Prezone the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way to Planned Unit Development (PUD) - Transportation Corridor Approval of a comprehensive PUD Development Plan for the Bernal Property, incorporating Development Standards and Design Guidelines, to govern future development of the Bemal Property. Approval of the Preannexation Development Agreement, Growth Management Agreement, Bernal Interchange Construction and Reimbursement Agreement, Bernal Bridge Construction and City Consultant's Fees Agreement, Agreement for Conveyance of Real Estate - Park Expansion Parcel, Agreement for Conveyance of Real Estate -Civic Center Property, and Verona Road Agreement for the Bemal Property project. The Planning Commission will also consider certification of the Environmental Impact Report. Mr. Brian Swift, Director of Planning and Community Development, noted the Commission's action of its previous meeting where the Commission took "straw votes" on 27 broad topics and continued the meeting to this evening for the formal action on recommendations regarding the San Francisco Bernal property to the City Council. He stated that the staff report outlines the process for the Planning Commission to move forward with regard to the application. He noted that there is a tabled motion before the Commission regarding the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report. Jeff Grote of the Planning Collaborative, representative for the applicant, thanked the Commission for its effort thus far and for meeting on a Friday evening. He advised that Bruce Lymbum would introduce individuals present this evening to address the plutonium questions and that following those speakers, he would address some of the other environmental issues. Bruce Lymbum stated that the applicant sees two questions before the Commission this evening on the issue of the possible existence of radioactive materials on the Bernal property. The first is whether testing for radioactive materials should take place prior to certification of the EIR. The second is whether Pleasanton loses control or jurisdiction over the scope of the investigations or required mediations by deferring testing to some other date. He advised that two experts are present to help answer those questions. Mr. Lymburn noted that based on the analysis of the two experts the answer to PLANN1NG COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 July 16, 1999