My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN090391
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
CCMIN090391
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:12 AM
Creation date
10/29/1999 10:22:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
7 <br /> <br />on a movable modular unit barrier for the orchestra pit which would <br />be completed by fall. She then presented a plaque of appreciation <br />to Ms. Dolores Bengtson for all her encouragement and efforts to <br />complete the renovation process. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer also expressed his appreciation to Ms. Severin for <br />all her work in improving Pleasanton culturally and making it a <br />better place to live. <br /> <br /> Moller Estate Project <br /> <br /> Ms. Becky Dennis, 838 Gray Fox Circle, expressed concern that <br />the presence of the Alameda whipsnake, a State and federal <br />threatened species, on the Moller Estate project was made public <br />five months after it was discovered and that neither the Preserve <br />Area Ridgelands Committee (PARC) nor the City had this vital piece <br />of information about the project site when the City agreed that the <br />procedure for further environmental review proposed by the <br />applicant was consistent with California Environmental Quality Act <br />(CEQA) requirements. She asked the City Attorney what <br />discretionary actions the Council could take to require the <br />preparation of a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and put the <br />project back into the CEQA process. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer referred the matter to Mr. Roush. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush replied that the project still needs to process its <br />tentative map, which would provide the procedural mechanism to <br />require further environmental information. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer inquired what Staff was doing about the matter. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift replied that the McGinnis Report was underway at the <br />time the PUD was being processed and is required to be submitted in <br />conjunction with the tentative map. He continued that CEQA, as <br />well as the procedure set out in the agreement between the <br />developer and the City, requires that as new information from <br />studies evolves, the project will either develop adequate <br />mitigation measures to ensure a negative impact on the environment <br />or will go through the EIR process. He indicated that there may be <br />significant changes to the project, which would bring it back <br />through the PUD process. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr inquired if an EIR would be specifically focused on <br />this problem area. <br /> <br /> - 5 - <br /> 9-3-91 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.