My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN072109
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
CCMIN072109
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2009 11:52:19 AM
Creation date
8/28/2009 11:52:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/21/2009
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN072109
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Principal Planner Janice Stern also reviewed the General Plan and EIR, reviewed the process and <br /> changes that have been made to both documents since the Council last reviewed it in September <br /> 2008. She said these changes resulted from new information received by staff, new programs that <br /> came into effect during that time, the passage of Measures PP and QQ, approval of the Stoneridge <br /> Drive Specific Plan amendment, and comments on the draft EIR and General Plan. <br /> The City received roughly 24 comments on the draft EIR from residents, community organizations, <br /> and local agencies. The most notable included comments concerning information on Native <br /> American presence in the local area, the location of projected jobs and methods for reducing <br /> vehicle miles travelled in association with those jobs, classification of Gateway intersections, land <br /> use designation in the East Pleasanton area, wildlife values in the Staples Ranch and Chain of <br /> Lakes area, quantification and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, the regional housing needs <br /> assessment, and an alternative to the project limiting the housing cap. She said staff received a <br /> letter today from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District requesting that alternative be <br /> analyzed. Staff's response is that it is not a feasible alternative since the cap is a voter approved <br /> measure. <br /> Ms. Stern outlined the most significant changes to the General Plan, stating that they primarily <br /> surrounded the topic of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. The Land Use Element <br /> was updated to make policies related to mixed -use transit compatible development and densities <br /> more binding. The Circulation Element includes new programs related to the funding of pedestrian <br /> and bicycle facilities, participation in commute alternatives, and the requirement of bicycle <br /> improvements in development. The Public Facilities Element added programs related to exceeding <br /> the goals for waste reduction and increasing participation in recycling programs. The Air Quality and <br /> Climate Change Element underwent extensive change, including the addition of "climate change" to <br /> the title; Pleasanton's response to climate change; the recent ICLEI inventory study; and goals, <br /> policies, and programs to address climate change. <br /> The Energy Element has additional information regarding the financing of energy retrofits as well as <br /> changes to several programs to make them more mandatory than discretionary. Staff has also <br /> added Appendix A which is a compilation of all the goals, policies, and programs throughout the <br /> Plan that are related to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. <br /> The EIR identified two areas of significant impact. In the area of transportation, two gateway <br /> intersections, Owens drive at Hopyard Road and Stoneridge Drive at Johnson Drive, for which <br /> mitigation is available but may conflict with the City's goals for pedestrian amenities and visual <br /> character at gateway intersections. The Plan also outlines development assumptions which are <br /> inconsistent with those used in the 2005 Ozone Strategy. The 2005 Ozone Strategy assumes a <br /> greater amount of housing development over and above the 29,000 -unit cap in the General Plan. <br /> This impact is significant and unavoidable. <br /> Staff and consultants examined the project alternatives which considered both dispersed growth <br /> and a concentrated growth alternative. Neither alternative would reduce those impacts to less than <br /> significant levels or achieve the project objectives. Therefore the City has balanced the benefits of <br /> the project against the environmental impacts and finds that the benefits to the community outweigh <br /> the environmental risks. <br /> Mayor Hosterman thanked Mr. Dolan and Ms. Stern for the presentation. She said that while the <br /> initial assumption that the updates would take 1 year were significantly underestimated, staff has <br /> worked to change the face, character and nature of the General Plan into a much better fit for the <br /> local and global community. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 5 of 14 July 21, 2009 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.