My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11 ATTACHMENT 8
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2007
>
100207
>
11 ATTACHMENT 8
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/28/2007 12:31:47 PM
Creation date
9/25/2007 1:56:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
10/2/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
11 ATTACHMENT 8
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
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
Ms. Decker explained that the first step in the process is to review the Draft EIR in a public <br />forum and receive comments from both the public and the Planning Commission. It will then <br />move to the City Council as a final environment document and will include the project after a <br />recommendation is provided by the Planning Commission. Should the Planning Commission <br />wish to have this item return to the Commission for additional review or to have staff to report <br />back on questions or concerns it may have, it can leave this public review and comment period <br />open and schedule it to come back. She noted that no action is intended at this time for this item. <br />Ms. Decker continued that some of the Commission's questions might be answered after the EIR <br />consultant, Ms. Roberta Mundie, addresses the Planning Commission in terms of the CEQA and <br />EIR processes and how the alternatives were determined. This can then be followed by a <br />project-specific discussion. <br />Ms. Mundie introduced herself and Ms. Suzanne Lampert of her staff. She stated that she would <br />review the main components of the Draft EIR, including the structure and the content of the EIR; <br />review the main findings relating to impacts under the variety of CEQA topics that are required <br />to be looked at; discuss the EIR's consideration of alternatives as described Ms. Decker; and then <br />summarize the conclusions of the Draft EIR and explain what the next steps would be. <br />Ms. Mundie stated that all EIRs have a similar look because what goes into them is largely <br />dictated by State law. She then explained that this Draft EIR has atwo-volume format - <br />Volume 1 is the EIR proper, and Volume 2 presents appendices to the EIR, including the <br />applicant's written narrative that accompanied the original PUD application of November 2003 <br />and a slightly amended written narrative that is associated with Alternative 4. It also has <br />technical background information on a variety of other topics, mostly methodological, and about <br />the visual simulations that describe how they are done. The last item is a long section of <br />excerpts from the Pleasanton General Plan, containing plans and policies that have some <br />relevance to this topic. <br />Ms. Mundie then proceeded to describe the contents of the Volume 1, highlighting the main <br />features of each Chapter: <br />Chapter 1 provides a summary that is required for all EIR's. <br />Chapter 2 describes the proposed project under the original application submitted. This is <br />not the project that would be going forward for Planning Commission consideration, but the <br />project that the Draft EIR started with, and, therefore, that to which most of the impact <br />analysis initially conducted pertains. It includes three graphics that present the general <br />location of the project, the site plan, and the development plan. Figure 3 shows not only <br />where all the parcel lines are but some of the details of project development that are of <br />importance, including the new water tank and the existing Kottinger water tank, the drainage <br />features associated with the different segments of the project, a 6.5-acre park, and "Street A," <br />which is the main street of the project and a continuation of Hearst Drive. The five courts are <br />public roads up to the end of the court, which are continued along private drives if they go <br />farther. <br />EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 12, 2006 Page 4 of 21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.