My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 10/26/83
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1983
>
PC 10/26/83
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2017 10:22:46 AM
Creation date
4/27/2007 4:13:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/26/1983
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 10/26/83
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
MINUTFS I'T <br />~~LANNING COMMISSION <br />10/26/83 <br />Page 22 <br />Commissioner Doherty stated it makes a lot of sense to take this <br />Growth Management Element and clear up any policies and inconsistencies <br />that were in it before. It will really allow the kind of development <br />that the City has long thought to have in the community despite <br />the fact that some people thought that the Element was inconsistent. <br />Commissioner Doherty then made a motion that the Planning Commission <br />finds that (a) all feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated <br />in the project and that other suggested mitigation measures and <br />alternatives are either within the jurisdiction of another agency <br />or are infeasible, all as spelled out in Exhibit A of the draft <br />resolution: (b) find that all significant effects have been eliminated <br />or substantially lessened where feasible; (c) find that the remaining <br />effects are acceptable because of the benefits outweigh the unavoidable <br />adverse environmental effects, all as enumerated in the draft <br />resolution and testimony made before the Commissioner; (d) recommend <br />that the City Council adopt a policy to require the feasible mitigation <br />measures described in the EIR in conjunction with project approvals <br />made pursuant to the Growth Management Element Amendment; and <br />(e) recommend approval of the text change to the Growth Management <br />Element as submitted under case GP-83-1. This motion was seconded <br />by Commissioner Lindsey. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />AYES: Commissioners <br /> and Chairman <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br />Doherty, Getty, Lindsey, Wilson <br />Jamieson <br />Resolution No. 2380 was entered and adopted recommending approval <br />of case GP-83-1 as motioned. <br />A motion was made by Commissioner Lindsey, seconded by Commissioner <br />Getty that the Planning Commission has read and reviewed the EIR <br />and find it complete and adequate for the PUD application as filed <br />under case PUD-81-30. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br />AYES: Commissioners Doherty, Getty, Lindsey, Wilson <br />and Chairman Jamieson <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br />Resolution No. 2381 was entered and adopted concerning the completeness <br />and adequacy of the EIR for the PUD application as filed under <br />case PUD-81-30. <br />-22- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.