My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
14
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
110717
>
14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/1/2017 11:39:33 AM
Creation date
11/1/2017 11:12:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
11/7/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
249
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
Council or City staff as part of the City files generated in connection with the proposed Zone. <br />Without exception, any documents set forth above not found in the City's files for the proposed <br />Zone fall into one of two categories. Many of them reflect prior planning or legislative decisions <br />with which the City Council was aware in approving the Zone. (See City of Santa Cruz v. Local <br />Agency Formation Commission [1978] 76 Cal.App.3d 381, 391-392; Dominey v. Department of <br />Personnel Administration [1988] 205 Ca1.App.3d729, 738, fn. 6.) Other documents influenced the <br />expert advice provided to City staff or consultants, who then provided advice to the City Council. <br />For that reason, such documents form part of the underlying factual basis for the City Council's <br />decisions relating to the adoption of the proposed Zone. (See Pub. Res. Code, §21167.6[e][10]; <br />Browning-Ferris Industries v. Planning Commission of City of San Jose [ 1986] 181 Cal.App.3d <br />852, 866; Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of Stanislaus [ 1995] 33 Cal.App.4th 144, <br />153, 155.) <br />E. Environmental Review of the Project <br />Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City determined that a <br />Supplement to the 2009 General Plan EIR and to the 2012 SEIR for the City's proposed Housing <br />Element and Climate Action Plan should be prepared to analyze the potential environmental <br />impact of the proposed Zone. A Notice of Preparation ("NOP") describing the proposed Zone <br />and issues to be addressed in the SEIR was distributed to responsible agencies, trustee agencies, <br />and other state agencies through the State Clearinghouse; and to other interested parties and <br />posted between August 27, 2014 and September 25, 2014. <br />The Draft Supplemental EIR ("Draft SEIR") was prepared and circulated for a 45 - <br />day public review period beginning September 14, 2015; the public review period was extended, <br />ending November 23, 2015. The Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive public <br />input on the Draft SEIR on September 23, 2015. Community meetings were also held to receive <br />public input on the Draft SEIR on October 22 and November 12, 2015. <br />Following the close of the public review period, responses to all comments <br />received on the Draft SEIR during the public review period were prepared, which in some cases <br />required revisions to the Draft SEIR intended to correct, clarify, and amplify the Draft SEIR. The <br />response to comments, changes to the Draft SEIR and additional information have been <br />incorporated into the Final Supplemental EIR ("Final SEIR"). <br />CEQA Guidelines §15088.5 requires a lead agency to recirculate an EIR for <br />further review and comment when significant new information is added to the EIR after public <br />notice is given of the availability of the Draft EIR but before certification. New information added <br />to an EIR is not "significant" unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a <br />meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the <br />project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect that the project proponent declines to <br />implement. The CEQA Guidelines provide examples of significant new information under this <br />standard. Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely <br />clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications to an adequate EIR. <br />On behalf of the City, ESA conducted a review of the Final SEIR to determine <br />whether new information has arisen that could trigger the recirculation of the SEIR prior to the <br />City's consideration of it for certification. This review concluded that recirculation was not <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.