Laserfiche WebLink
2 <br />Amenities would include an outdoor common area with a bocce ball court, picnic tables, barbeque <br />stations, and paved seating/dining area. The project would also include pedestrian access to the <br />Pleasanton Canal Trail and Pleasanton Tennis Park to the south of the project site. A total of 111 <br />car parking spaces, including 105 garages, would be provided, as well as 77 bike parking spaces. <br />Primary site access would be provided by two new driveways off of South Valley Trails Drive and <br />would connect to an internal roadway system. <br />Raney anticipates the project would require City approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map and <br />Design Review. <br />APPROACH <br />Based on Raney’s preliminary review of the project and discussions with the City, it appears that <br />the proposed project is consistent with the City of Pleasanton General Plan land use and zoning <br />designations for the site. Pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21083.3 and Section <br />15183 of the CEQA Guidelines, a project that is consistent with the development density <br />established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was <br />certified shall not require additional environmental review, except when it is necessary to examine <br />whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. <br />This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive <br />environmental studies. <br />More specifically, the requirements of Section 15183(b) state the following: <br />(b)In approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall <br />limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, <br />in an initial study or other analysis: <br />(1)Are peculiar1 to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located, <br />(2)Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general <br />plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent, <br />(3)Are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not <br />discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning <br />action, or <br />(4)Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new <br />information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined <br />to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR. <br />Raney proposes to prepare a Modified IS Checklist to confirm whether the proposed project’s <br />environmental effects meet any of the conditions identified in Section 15183. If none of the <br />conditions or exceptions are met, the proposed project’s environmental effects are not subject to <br />further CEQA review. <br />1 According to 15183(f), an effect of a project on the environment shall not be considered peculiar to the project or <br />the parcel for the purposes of this section if uniformly applied development policies or standards have been previously <br />adopted by the city or county with a finding that the development policies or standards will substantially mitigate that <br />environmental effect when applied to future projects, unless substantial new information shows that the policies or <br />standards will not substantially mitigate the environmental effect. <br />DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FA212B2-C9C9-4BE6-8FD2-66034B064F8CDocuSign Envelope ID: FE1B6497-6527-4DEE-8F28-BF9999E929AA