My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
16
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2010
>
081710
>
16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2010 4:29:45 PM
Creation date
8/10/2010 4:29:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
8/17/2010
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
92
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
PROJECT DESCRIPTION <br /> The applicant requests that the Development Agreement be extended from <br /> September 27, 2010 to September 27, 2017 as to its 39.22 -acre parcel. The site plan of <br /> the approved office development now covered by the Development Agreement is shown <br /> below. <br /> �} a <br /> .w <br /> DISCUSSION <br /> Staff considers the proposal to be a minor change of the City Council's approval of the <br /> Pleasanton Gateway office development and, therefore, appropriate. The building, <br /> site, and landscape design approved by the City Council will not be changed. <br /> If the extension is approved by the City Council, the development rights and <br /> responsibilities described in the Development Agreement will remain in effect as to the <br /> Pleasanton Gateway property to September 27, 2017, therefore, enabling Pleasanton <br /> Gateway to proceed with its office development if it so desires when the economic <br /> climate improves. <br /> Planning Commission Public Hearing <br /> At its May 12, 2010, public hearing, a Planning Commissioner inquired what, if any, <br /> bearing the Urban Habitat litigation and court order would have on this request. Staff <br /> explained that there would be no effect unless the developers were ready to move <br /> forward immediately with construction, which they are not. The Planning Commission <br /> had other questions regarding the consideration of the property as a site for high density <br /> housing. Staff responded that although the only sites mentioned in the court order are <br /> the Hacienda Business Park, the Housing Element update process will require <br /> evaluation of several additional sites for high density housing and some of these may <br /> already have entitlements. Mr. Trobbe has indicated that he is willing to discuss the <br /> 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.