My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN041696
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
CCMIN041696
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:45 AM
Creation date
5/13/1999 10:12:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/16/1996
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Swift indicated that alternatives are designed to be included in the process so <br />different ways of mitigating environmental impacts can be considered. Staff has been looking <br />at different ways of adding or subtracting elements of the plan, but those do not have a lot to <br />do with mitigating impacts. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver recapped what he saw as the options: to allow Calthorpe to finish the <br />alternative and include that in the FJR or to have him finish his alternative and bring that back <br />to Council for review and before proceeding to the EIR. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift believed there were enough of the elements to include the proposed plan in the <br />EIR and to proceed with the EIR without coming back to Council. Curren~y the EIR is <br />structured to include the Cooperative Plan and the revised Calthorpe plan as an alternative. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis asked if the hearings on the EIR could do double duty and allow changes to <br />the Calthorpe based on the public input. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti felt hearings on the EIR were to address impact issues, not the design of <br />the project. She believed Council could review whatever gets here first, whether it is the EIR <br />or the revised plan. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated staff would forward the revised plan as soon as it is complete and <br />there can certainly be a Council meeting to discuss the elements. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarvex asked how moving elements would affect the EIR. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift felt there would not be a lot of impact with regard to reviewing the FJR <br />because it would consider alternatives in any event. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr really wanted to see the plan on paper so everyone is working with the same <br />information. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver indicated the question is whether to allow staff to proceed with the EIR with <br />the understanding that there is still flexibility to move the pieces. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti agreed that was the general direction, but wanted to hear from the public <br />first. <br /> <br /> Kay Ayala, 4515 Gatetree Circle, felt Council was making progress. She referred to the <br />conceptual plan approved on April 11, 1996 and felt there was consensus on the pieces (school, <br />shopping area, sports park, golf course, etc.) but she never heard anyone say they wanted "new <br />urbanism" or "neo-traditional". She did not feel there was direction to proceed with neo- <br />traditional planning. <br /> <br />04/16/96 <br /> -10- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.