My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
RES 211231 Exhibit A
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2020-present
>
2021
>
RES 211231 Exhibit A
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/21/2021 4:00:01 PM
Creation date
6/21/2021 3:40:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
6/15/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
Document Relationships
RES 211231
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\RESOLUTIONS\2020-present\2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
189
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
Environmental Checklist and City of Pleasanton–10x Genomics Project <br />Environmental Evaluation Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration <br /> <br /> <br />22 FirstCarbon Solutions <br />Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480024/ISMND/wp/21480024 10x Genomics Project Full Screencheck ISMND.docx <br />The project site is currently zoned C-R (p), and the Applicant is requesting approval to rezone the site <br />to PUD-C-O, which would allow R&D and light laboratory manufacturing uses on the project site.8 <br />When a project includes an amendment to the zoning, inconsistency with the existing designation or <br />zoning is an element of the project itself, which then necessitates a legislative policy decision by the <br />agency and does not signify a potential environmental effect. As such, the proposed project would <br />be consistent with the permitted land uses of the PUD-C-O zone upon approval of the requested <br />zone change, and the rezoning would not result in an environmental impact. Upon approval of the <br />rezoning, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable zoning and other regulations <br />governing scenic quality. Impacts would be less than significant. <br />d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime <br />views in the area? <br />Less than significant impact. A shade and shadow study was completed for the proposed project <br />that analyzed the shade and shadow impacts of the proposed project during winter, summer, spring, <br />and fall in the morning and evening (Appendix K). The proposed buildings would cast shadows to the <br />northwest during winter mornings and to the northeast during winter evenings. In the spring and fall <br />the proposed buildings would cast shadows to the northwest during the mornings and west during <br />the evenings. During the summer, the proposed buildings would cast shadows to the west during the <br />morning and to the east in the evenings. Most of the shadows cast by the proposed buildings would <br />occur within the project site. The adjacent properties most impacted would be the surface parking <br />lot to the northwest and the residential uses to the west. However, the shadows cast by the <br />proposed building would move away from these areas in less than an hour and would not <br />significantly impact these land uses. <br />The existing development on the project site generates light and glare from parking lots, driveways, <br />buildings, and vehicles. Pursuant to the City’s Zoning Ordinance Chapter 18.68, Planned Unit <br />Development District, the City would ensure that the proposed redevelopment would be in the best <br />interest of the health, safety, and general welfare of the public and that it would be consistent with <br />City of Pleasanton’s General Plan policies regarding lighting and glare prior to project approval.9 <br />Additionally, the proposed project would comply with Part 6 of the California Energy Code <br />requirements related to outdoor lighting, which requires exterior light fixtures to be directed <br />downward to prevent light trespass.10 The proposed buildings to be constructed during Phase 1 of <br />the proposed project would be 68 feet in height and the buildings in Phase 2 and 3 would be up to <br />82 feet in height. The existing trees along Stoneridge Mall Road and Stoneridge Drive would shield <br />existing uses from any light and glare produced by the proposed project. Additionally, the proposed <br />project is anticipated to operate during typical business hours. Therefore, the proposed <br />redevelopment would not substantially alter the existing light and glare on the project site such that <br />the proposed project would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Although Phase 1 <br />may include expansion of existing surface parking areas, any new lighting required for these areas <br /> <br />8 City of Pleasanton. 2021. Pleasanton Municipal Code, Chapter 18.68 PUD Planned Unit Development District. Website: <br />http://qcode.us/codes/pleasanton/?view=desktop&topic=18-18_84-18_84_270. Accessed January 15, 2021. <br />9 Ibid. <br />10 California Building Standards Commission. 2019. California Energy Code, Title 24, Part 6. July. Website: <br />codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAEC2019/subchapter-6-nonresidential-high-rise-residential-and-hotel-motel-occupancies-additions- <br />alterations-and-repairs. Accessed February 9, 2021.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.