My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
RES 85351
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
1980-1989
>
1985
>
RES 85351
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/24/2012 4:22:05 PM
Creation date
12/28/1999 12:07:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
7/16/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
for roadway improvements and one for freeway improvements only. <br /> <br /> 4. At the time and place for which notice was given, <br /> the City Council conducted a public hearing and gave every <br /> interested person an opportunity to object to the proposed <br /> roadway improvements, the extent of the assessment district, or <br /> the proposed assessment. <br /> <br /> 5. The Council finds that written protests against the <br /> proposed roadway improvement have not be~n made by owners <br /> representing more than one-half of the area of the land to be <br /> assessed for the improvement. <br /> <br /> 6. An EIR was prepared, public hearings held, and the <br /> FIR was certified as complete and adequate on February 12, 1985 <br /> and the project was approved, subject to conditions. <br /> <br /> 7. The E~R indicates significant environmental effects <br />would result from the project as summarized in the Significant <br />Effects and Findings, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and <br />incorporated herein by reference, and as more completely <br />discussed in the EIR itself. <br /> <br /> 8. The City Council finds that potentially significant <br />environmental effects either (1) have been avoided or <br />substantially lessened by changes and alterations which have been <br />incorporated into the project during the review process, <br />including conditions of approval (2) require mitigation by <br />another public agency having jurisdiction, or (3) cannot be <br />mitigated except by mitigation measures or alternatives found to <br />be infeasible given economic, social, environmental, and other <br />considerations. The facts and findings supporting these findings <br /> <br /> 5 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.