My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC-92-80
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
PC-92-80
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2006 9:33:58 AM
Creation date
5/4/2005 3:44:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/9/1992
DOCUMENT NO
PC-92-80
DOCUMENT NAME
PUD-81-30-26M/PUD-85-8-8M
NOTES
PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE CO
NOTES 3
DEVT AGMTS GOVERNING 262 ACRES OFHBP
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
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 />D. city and Developer desire to supersede the Phase I <br />Development Agreement and the Phase II Development Agreement as <br />they affect the Property, and to substitute in their places this <br />Agreement. <br /> <br />E. Because of the mitigation measures imposed pursuant to <br />the Phase I PUD, the Phase II PUD and PUD, City has found in <br />connection with its review and consideration of this Agreement <br />that no subsequent or supplemental environmental impact reports <br />("EIR's") are necessary or required under the California <br />Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") in order to enact the terms <br />and conditions of this Agreement. specifically, but without <br />limitinq the generality of the foregoinq, the City has found and <br />determined that there are no substantial changes in the project, <br />or in the circumstances under which the Project is to be <br />undertaken pursuant to this Agreement inVOlving new effects not <br />considered in previous EIR's, and that no further environmental <br />analysis is requi~ed under CEQA. <br /> <br />F. On , 1992, after review of <br />Developer'S application for this Agreement by the planning <br />Director and other city agencies and departments, and <br />consideration of all other evidence heard and submitted at a duly <br />noticed public hearing, the Planning commission found and <br />determined that the terms of this Agreement are consistent with <br />the objectives, pOlicies, general plan uses and programs <br />specified in the City'S General Plan; are compatible with the <br />uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the land <br />use districts in which the Property is located; conform to and <br />will promote public safety, general welfare and good land use <br />practices; will not be detrimental to the health, safety and <br />general welfare of the region surrounding the City; will not <br />adversely affect the orderly development of property or the <br />preservation of property values within the city; and will promote <br />and encourage the development of the Project by providing a <br />greater degree of certainty with respect thereto. <br /> <br />G. On , 1992, following a duly noticed <br />public hearing, the city Council found this Agreement to be <br />consistent with the City'S General Plan and introduced Ordinance <br />No. ("Enacting Ordinance"). On <br />1992, the City Council adopted the Enacting Ordinance as a <br />legislative action intended to exercise the City'S regulatory <br />authority pertaining to development of the property in accordance <br />the terms of this Agreement. <br /> <br />NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority granted in <br />Government Code, section 65864 through 65869.5, and in <br />consideration of Developer'S partial performance of the terms of <br />the Phase I Development Agreement and the Phase II Development <br />Agreement, and the mutual covenants and promises of the parties <br />herein contained, this Agreement provides as follows: <br /> <br />- 2 - <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.