Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING COMMISSION <br />CITY OF PLEASANTON <br />COUNTY OF ALAMEDA <br />STATE OF CALIFORNIA <br />RESOLUTION NO. 2379 <br />A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE <br />CITY OF PLEASANTON RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE <br />ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) PREPARED FOR <br />CASE GP -83 -1 <br />WHEREAS, in May 1982, the Planning Commission recommended approval <br />of the development plan and planned unit development zoning <br />for the Hacienda Business Park and in June of that year, <br />the City Council took action approving the project. Subsequently <br />the PUD and accompanying EIR were challenged in court by <br />Citizens for Balanced Growth (CBG), a small group of valley <br />residents opposed to the development. All of the CBG's <br />challenges to the EIR were dismissed by the judge but he <br />concurred with their contention that approval of the PUD <br />itself was inconsistent with Pleasanton's General Plan because <br />of a goal in the Growth Management Element which calls for <br />a balance among land uses within the City. He felt that <br />approval of Hacienda created the potential for generating <br />more jobs within the City than there would be housing to <br />accommodate those workers: and <br />WHEREAS, approval (Ordinance No. 1040) was set aside by the judge <br />...unless or until amendment is made to either Hacienda <br />Business Park or to the General Plan such that Hacienda <br />is consistent with the General Plan;" and <br />WHEREAS, the City Council decided to take the latter tack and initiated <br />an amendment to the Growth Management Element of the General <br />Plan to clarify that the projected employment from the Hacienda <br />Business Park and 21 other commercial and industrial projects <br />approved in the City through May 1983 are consistent with <br />maintaining a balance among land uses within the City; and <br />WHEREAS, at their duly noticed public hearing of October 26, 1983, <br />the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information <br />in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in conformance <br />with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) prepared <br />for the proposed text change to the Growth Management Element <br />amendment; and <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all public testimony, <br />relevant exhibits and recommendations of the City Staff <br />concerning the Environmental Impact Report prepared for <br />the proposed text change to the Growth Management Element <br />of the General Plan. <br />NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON <br />RESOLVES THE FOLLOWING: <br />Section 1. Certifies that the Planning Commission has read and reviewed <br />the EIR and find it complete and adequate for the Growth <br />Management Element Amendment proposed under case GP -83 -1. <br />