My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
22
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
061615
>
22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 11:53:30 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 12:21:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/16/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
22
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
130
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
Jenny Soo <br /> May 8,2015 <br /> Page 2 <br /> Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162,the 2014 Addendum made the following conclusions: <br /> (1) The modifications to the 2014 project did not require major revisions to the Supplemental EIR <br /> due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the <br /> severity of previously identified significant effects. <br /> (2) Substantial changes did not occur with respect to the circumstances under which the 2014 <br /> project would have been undertaken which would have required major revisions of the <br /> Supplemental EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a <br /> substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. The <br /> circumstances under which the 2014 project was to be undertaken were substantially the same <br /> as under the Supplemental EIR. <br /> (3) There was no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not <br /> have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Supplemental EIR <br /> was certified,that shows any of the following: <br /> (A) The 2014 project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous <br /> Supplemental EIR; <br /> (B) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be <br /> feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the 2014 project, <br /> but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative;or <br /> (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives which were considerably different from those analyzed <br /> in the previous Supplemental EIR would have substantially reduced one or more significant <br /> effects on the environment, but the project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation <br /> measure or alternative. <br /> As such,the 2014 Addendum appropriately disclosed potential environmental impacts from the <br /> previously proposed Summer Hill Apartment Community,thereby satisfying the requirements of CEQA. <br /> The Summer Hill Apartment Community and 2014 Addendum were considered at the February 26, 2014 <br /> Planning Commission meeting and were unanimously recommended for City Council approval. However, <br /> the 2014 project was never constructed. <br /> Revised Project Description <br /> The applicant, Summer Hill Homes, has now revised the project, renaming it as the Las Positas <br /> Townhome Condominiums (referred to herein as the 2015 project). The proposed 2015 project consists <br /> of the development of a 94-unit residential townhome condominium community with three open space <br /> areas consisting of a central courtyard, paseos, open green area,and tot lot. The 94 townhome <br /> condominiums would consist of two-,three-,and four-bedroom floor plans located in 16 two-and three- <br /> story buildings of varying massing and size. The unit mix would consist of 10 two-bedroom units, 70 <br /> three-bedroom units, and 14 four-bedroom units. <br /> Buildings 1 through 7, located on the northern half of the property would be oriented parallel to West <br /> Las Positas Boulevard and would taper down to two stories at the project's west and east boundaries to <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.