Laserfiche WebLink
Ordinance No. 2220 <br /> Page 2 of 26 <br /> Report/Tree Survey, Biological Resources Analysis, Geotechnical Investigation, Noise <br /> Assessment Study, and Health Risk Assessment Memorandum. The assessments identified <br /> measures sufficient to reduce project impacts to a less-than-significant level, and these measures <br /> are incorporated as conditions of approval. In addition, the technical studies identified no new <br /> information or changed circumstances that would require supplemental environmental review, is <br /> consistent with the previously approved EIR, is adequate to serve as the environmental <br /> documentation for this Project and satisfy all the requirements of the CEQA. <br /> Based on the foregoing, the City Council finds that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, <br /> projects consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning, additional environmental <br /> review is not required because there are no project-specific significant effects peculiar to the <br /> project or its site that would result from the proposed project. Accordingly, no changes to <br /> mitigation measures, findings, or statement of overriding considerations are needed. <br /> SECTION 2. With respect to the Planned Unit Development application, PUD-114-01M, <br /> the City Council makes the following findings and determinations with respect to each of the <br /> considerations for approval of a PUD Development Plan as required by Section 18.68.110 of the <br /> Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC): <br /> 1. Whether the proposed development plan is in the best interest of the public <br /> health, safety, and general welfare. <br /> The City Council finds that the proposed project, as conditioned, meets all applicable <br /> City standards concerning public health, safety, and welfare. The subject development <br /> would include the installation of all required on-site utilities, with connections to <br /> municipal systems in order to serve the new lots. The project will not generate volumes <br /> of traffic that cannot be accommodated by existing City streets and intersections in the <br /> area. The structures would be designed to meet the requirements of the California <br /> Building Code, California Fire Code, and other applicable City codes. The proposed <br /> development is compatible with the adjacent uses and would be generally consistent <br /> with the existing scale of development and rural character of the area. Adequate <br /> setbacks would be provided between the new church and adjacent properties, <br /> including Dublin Creek. City Council finds the proposed PUD development plan is in <br /> the best interests of the public health, safety, and general welfare, and that this finding <br /> can be made. As such, the City Council concludes this finding can be made. <br /> 2. Whether the proposed development plan is consistent with the Pleasanton <br /> General Plan and any applicable specific plan. <br /> The proposed development includes the construction of a new religious facility on an <br /> approximately 4.3-acre portion of the 16-acre site. Religious facilities are Conditionally <br /> Permitted in residential zones and therefore conforms to the General Plan Rural <br /> Density Residential land use designation, with the remaining agricultural parcel with <br /> Open Space. The proposed project would promote General Plan Programs and <br /> Policies to maintain a complete well-rounded community of desirable neighborhoods, <br /> a strong employment base, and a variety of community facilities including religious. <br /> Thus, the City Council finds the proposed development plan is consistent with the <br /> City's General Plan, and believes this finding can be made. <br /> 3. Whether the proposed development plan is compatible with the previously <br /> developed properties in the vicinity and the natural, topographic features of the <br /> site. <br />