Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Brandes asked at what point would the reduction of units <br />require the project to return to the Planning Commission for.approval. <br />~Mr. MacDonald stated that when there is a substantial change which was not <br /> onsidered by the Planning Commission, it must then return for approval. <br />n this case, all the lower density alternatives were considered; <br />therefore, the reduction in number of units would not require this project <br />"Dto return to the Planning Commission. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilmember Brandes , and seconded by Councilmember- <br /> ~utler that Resolution No. 85-429, determining on the basis of a review of <br /> the review of an Initial Study, the City of Pleasanton has found that the <br /> proposed project (including any mitigation measures which will be <br /> incorporated in the project) would not have ~ significant effect on the <br /> environment. The City of Pleasanton has concluded, therefore, that is not <br /> necessary to prepare an Environmental Impact Report on the proposed project <br /> in connection with case Z-85-155, application of Stoneson Development <br />--Corporation for design review approval to construct a 180 unit apartment <br /> complex on an approximately 13 acre site located on the south side of <br /> Stoneridge Drive between Pleasanton Hill Drive and Springdale Avenue, be <br /> adopted. <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Butler, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Mercer <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> Councilmember Wood thanked the homeowners for coming in with what they <br /> will accept rather than saying they don't want apartments and not <br /> compromising at all. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Butler stated that he was glad to see citizens come to <br /> the meeting to express their concerns. He stated that the project is <br /> considerably within the zoning standards and feels that since Gold Creek <br /> cannot be worked in that the net acreage should be considered. <br /> Councilmember Butler stated that he felt 198 to 204 units would be <br /> appropriate. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Mohr stated that Council has no control in regards to <br /> owner versus rental. She also stated that she would like to see the space <br /> left over from the reduction of units should go towards parking, with the <br /> bulk going towards landscaping. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Brandes suggested that staff review the colors of the <br /> complex for approval, to which Council agreed. <br /> <br /> 9-3-85 11 <br /> <br /> <br />