My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 072606
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
PC 072606
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:24:49 PM
Creation date
7/12/2007 9:49:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/26/2006
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 072606
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
In response to Commissioner Olson's inquiry if the Draft EIR stage is that part of process <br />where other alternatives can be added to the mix, Ms. Decker said no. She stated that at <br />this stage, the environmental document is being considered in terms of the range of <br />alternatives which are less envirotunentally sound versus what is environmentally <br />preferred. She noted that the purpose of the Planning Commission meeting is to provide <br />a public form for the Commission and the general public to make comments on the <br />document. She added that the presentation and discussion of comments is not limited to <br />this public heazing forum and that staff will be accepting comments related to the Drafr <br />EIR from the Commission, the Council, and the general public until the end of the public <br />comment period. She stated that the consultant will then address all these concerns in the <br />Final EIR. <br />Commissioner Olson noted that he has read all the records and emails regarding the <br />previous project for this sites and questioned why other alternatives which aze acceptable <br />to the community cannot be considered at this time. <br />At this point, Ms. Hatryman advised the. Commission that they needed to wrap up the <br />discussion on this item because under the Brown Act, staff is allowed to briefly respond <br />to questions during Matters Initiated by Commission Members. She then stated that the <br />Commission will have the opportunity at the August 23`d meeting to talk about the <br />alternatives in the Draft EIR and what altematives the Commission would like to see. <br />She clarified, however, that this does not mean there will be responses to those comments <br />~" or that the Final EIR will analyze the alternatives recommended by the Commission; the <br />Final EIR will, however, respond to suggestions for other alternatives. <br />Commissioner Peazce indicated that every comment will have a response in the Final <br />EIR. <br />Commissioner Fox requested that for the August 23`d meeting, staff provide the <br />Commission with all the supporting documents referenced in the Draft EIR such as the <br />Berlogaz geotechnical report, noise studies, azchitectural or archaeological reports, soils <br />analysis, and all reports that aze specific to the site, as well as the Pleasanton Unified <br />School District report on enrollment projections. <br />Chairperson Arkin reiterated his request to walk the site with staff. <br />Commissioner Blank joined the Commission on the dais. <br />Staff Review Boazd Meetin¢s <br />Commissioner Peazce inquired if Commissioners could sit in on Staff Review Boazd <br />meetings to give them an understanding of the process an application goes through before <br />it comes before the Commission. <br />~., Ms. Decker replied that the Commissioners aze welcome to attend the meetings. She <br />added that it is at these meetings that staff from the different departments get a first look <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 26, 2006 Page 22 of 24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.