My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11 ATTACHMENTS 02-04
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
101513
>
11 ATTACHMENTS 02-04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2013 4:21:34 PM
Creation date
10/9/2013 4:21:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/15/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
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
DRAFT <br /> Commissioner O'Connor inquired it if does not give more emphasis to the Preferred <br /> Plan but just uses that as the base. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that there is definitely more text to it. He noted that the analysis starts <br /> with the one alternative, but then there is an alternative section which basically states <br /> what is different between this particular alternative and the other one. He added that it <br /> would then identify, for example, that this one alternative is not going to have that <br /> impact or that other alternative will have an additional impact; those impacts will have to <br /> be identified as well as potential mitigations for the differences. <br /> Chair Pearce commented that she thinks people get caught up on the language of a <br /> "Preferred Plan." <br /> Commissioner Ritter inquired if the City can go through and do the EIR for the Preferred <br /> Plan but then choose, say, Option 6, and would the City have the information in the <br /> Preferred Plan EIR to cover Option 6. <br /> Mr. Dolan said yes. <br /> O'Connor stated that he thought Option 6 would not be used for comparison because <br /> the number of units was higher than those on the Preferred Plan. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that there is an analysis for Option 6, which is the worst case, and the <br /> City can then select anything below that. He acknowledged the concern that calling an <br /> alternative a "Preferred Plan" can cause some people to say that it gives it some sort of <br /> a special status and some momentum to go forward. He added that he understands <br /> that people might feel that way about that terminology, but it is not legally binding to do <br /> it that way. <br /> Commissioner Ritter inquired if it can be called the "EIR Plan" instead of the "Preferred <br /> Plan." <br /> Mr. Dolan explained that ultimately, the people who would be poking holes or evaluating <br /> or analyzing whether or not the EIR is adequate would be attorneys, and no matter what <br /> it is called, they will know that it is the Preferred Plan in normal CEQA terminology. He <br /> indicated that he thinks it does not matter what it is called and recommended that if the <br /> Commission wanted a suggestion for something different than "Preferred Plan," it be <br /> called it the "Base Project" because it implies then that it is what the other Alternatives <br /> are being compared to. He indicated that he is open to other suggestions as well. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor stated that based on some of the letters received from the <br /> public on this matter, people put a lot of emphasis on wanting a certain plan to be the <br /> Preferred Plan when this really is just the basis for studying the EIR and it is not a <br /> decision to accept. <br /> DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 9/25/2013 Page 11 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.