My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
04 ATTACHMENT 2
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
081721
>
04 ATTACHMENT 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/12/2021 4:18:38 PM
Creation date
8/12/2021 4:03:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
8/17/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
04
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2021\081721
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
ATTACHMENT 2 <br />RESOLUTION NO. 21 - <br />RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON APPROVING <br />AN APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AND <br />OPERATE A 9,792 -SQUARE -FOOT CHURCH AND 24,971 -SQUARE -FOOT MULTI- <br />PURPOSE BUILDING WITH GYMNASIUM ON A 4.3 -ACRE PORTION OF THE 16 - <br />ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 11300 DUBLIN CANYON ROAD, AS FILED UNDER CASE <br />NO. P20-0994 <br />WHEREAS, on November 30, 2020, Guy Houston, on behalf of Resurrection Greek <br />Orthodox Church ("Applicant") applied for a Conditional Use Permit to construct and operate a <br />9,792 -square -foot church and 24,971 -square -foot multi-purpose building with gymnasium on a <br />4.3 -acre portion of the 16 -acre site ("Project) located at 11300 Dublin Canyon Road ("Property); <br />and <br />WHEREAS, the Property is designated Rural Density Residential in the General Plan; and <br />WHEREAS, the Property is Zoned PUD-RDR/A-OS (Planned Unit Development — Rural <br />Density Residential/Agriculture and Open Space) District; and <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a work session on April 14, 2021 regarding <br />the Project; and then at its regular meeting on July 14, 2021, adopted Resolution PC -2021-12, <br />recommending the City Council approve the project application; and <br />WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on August 17, 2021, the City Council received <br />the recommendation of City staff and the Planning Commission, and the public was given the <br />opportunity to comment on the Project; and <br />NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF <br />PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING: <br />Section 1. The City Council does hereby find the proposed project is consistent with the <br />development density, land uses, development standards and other key parameters established <br />by the Pleasanton Municipal Code, PUD Development Plan, and General Plan, which were <br />reviewed pursuant to CEQA in a previously certified and/or adopted environmental document <br />including the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared forthe Pleasanton 2005-2025 General <br />Plan, certified in July 2009 which was adopted and certified by the City Council in 2009 under City <br />Council Resolution No. 09-312. In order to provide additional project -level analysis, the applicant <br />provided an additional Arborist Report/Tree Assessment, Biological Resources Analysis, <br />Geotechnical Investigation, Noise Assessment Study, and Health Risk Assessment <br />Memorandum. The assessments identified measures sufficient to reduce project impacts to a <br />less -than -significant level, and these measures are incorporated as conditions of approval. In <br />addition, the technical studies identified no new information or changed circumstances that would <br />require supplemental environmental review, and is consistent with the previously approved EIR <br />that it is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for this Project and satisfy all the <br />requirements for CEQA. <br />Based on the foregoing, the City Council finds pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section <br />15183, Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning, additional <br />environmental review is not required because there are no project -specific significant effects <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.