My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC-92-16
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
PC-92-16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2006 9:33:51 AM
Creation date
4/20/2005 3:17:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
2/20/1992
DOCUMENT NO
PC-92-16
DOCUMENT NAME
PUD-89-17
NOTES
CURRIN CONSTRUCTION/OAK TREE FARM
NOTES 3
68 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />'0 <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON <br />ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. PC-92-16 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CASE PUD-89-17, THE <br />APPLICATION OP CURRIN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY <br /> <br />WHEREAS, currin construction company has applied for approval of <br />a development plan to permit the construction of 68 <br />single-family custom homes in addition to an existing <br />home on an approximately 91 acre site located at 8015 <br />Foothill Road; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the property has been prezoned for PUD (Planned Unit <br />Development) Rural and Low Density Residential District, <br />and the property is located within the West Foothill Road <br />Corridor overlay District; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, at their duly noticed public hearing of February 12, <br />1992, and February 20, 1992, the Planning Commission, <br />after considering all public testimony, relevant <br />exhibits, and recommendations of the city staff <br />concerning this proposal, certified an Environmental <br />Impact Report for Case PUD-89-17 and recommended approval <br />of the CEQA findings; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that the prezoning PUD <br />(Planned Unit Development) - Rural and Low Density <br />Residential District is consistent with the General Plan; <br />and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following PUD findings: <br /> <br />1. The plan is in the best interests of the public <br />health, safety, and general welfare: <br /> <br />The SEIR for the project has analyzed in detail the <br />potential effects of constructing 68 homes on the <br />site. Although the SEIR identified a number of <br />issues and potentially significant adverse impacts, <br />the SEIR recommends mitigation measures which would <br />reduce the impacts to an acceptable or less than <br />significant level. staff has recommended other <br />conditions to ensure that the project meets the <br />development and design goals of the city. <br /> <br />2. The plan is consistent with the city's General <br />Plan: <br /> <br />.. ." . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.