Laserfiche WebLink
WHEREAS, <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br />WHEREAS, <br />WHEREAS, <br />WHEREAS, <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />WHEREAS, <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON <br />ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA <br />ORDINANCE NO. 1804 <br /> <br />AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A SECOND AMENDMENT <br />TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE <br />SECURITY TRUST COMPANY REGARDING THE <br />STONERIDGE REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER <br /> <br />Government Code Section 65865 through Section 65869.5 authorizes cities and <br />cormties to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal <br />or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property; and <br /> <br />in 1992, the City of Pleasanton adopted Ordinance No. 1578, approving a <br />development agreement between the City and the Security Truest Company, for the <br />Stoneridge Regional Shopping Cemer; and <br /> <br />in 1997, the Security Trust Company applied to the City for an amendment to the <br />development agreement; and <br /> <br />in January 1998, the City Council approved the First Amendment to the <br />development agreement; and <br /> <br />in December 1999, the Security Trust Company applied to the City for a Second <br />Amendment to the development agreement; and <br /> <br />after public notice, the Planning Commission held a hearing and reconunended <br />approval of the Second Amendment to the development agreement; and <br /> <br />at its meeting of May 2, 2000, the City Coancil reviewed the staff report from the <br />Director of Planning and Community Development (SR 00:067) together with a <br />copy of the staff report to the Planning Commission regarding this marker; and <br /> <br />on May 2, 2000, a duly-noticed public hearing was held, at which time the <br />applicant and all other members of the public were offered an oppommity to <br />present evidence regarding the Second Amendinent to the development agreement; <br />and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, minor changes to land use regulations such as this application are categorically <br /> exempt from CEQA; and <br /> <br /> <br />