Laserfiche WebLink
467 <br /> <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br />item 9b <br />RZ-88-12, Application of the City of Pleasanton to prezone an <br />approximately one acre site to the PUD (Planned Unit Development)- <br />Medium Density Residential District, an approximately twenty acre <br />site to the PUD (Planned Unit Development)-Low Density Residential <br />District, and an approximately ten acre site to the PUD (Planned <br />Unit Development)-Medium/Hiqh Density Residential District located <br />qenerally in the area on both sides of Trenery Drive approximately <br />600 feet west of the intersection of Trenery Drive and Martin <br />Avenue <br /> <br />Consider Adoption of Neqative Declaration <br /> Mr. Swift presented his report (SR 89:17) dated January 3, <br />1989, regarding this matter. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing open on the <br />application and the negative declaration. <br /> <br /> No one in the audience spoke in favor of or in opposition to <br />the item. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Brandes stated he is in favor of the annexation <br />but felt the prezoning should not be determined until after the <br />results of the Stoneridge Drive Specific Plan are known. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated the prezoning is consistent with the General <br />Plan and therefore the Specific Plan should be consistent with the <br />General Plan. If the General Plan says this is not the proper <br />plan then the General Plan would have to be amended; in this case <br />the prezoning is consistent. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Brandes stated he felt that with regard to the <br />Environmental Impact Report, the item of Impacts on Public <br />Services should be marked "May be Significant" rather than <br />"Insignificant", and that Growth-Inducinq Impact should also be <br />marked "May be Significant" instead of "Insignificant". He felt <br />he needed more specific information. Mr. Swift advised that staff <br />completed the environmental impact study in conjunction with the <br />Specific Plan and it does not show a problem with the public <br />services. <br /> <br /> After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Brandes to <br />approve the negative declaration, and to change Items 9 (Impacts <br />on Public Services) and 11 (Growth-Inducing Impact) to be marked <br />"May be Significant" in place of "Insignificant". <br /> <br /> The motion died for lack of a second. <br /> <br /> - 9 - 1-3-89 <br /> <br /> <br />