My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11 ATTACHMENTS 9 -16
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
110315
>
11 ATTACHMENTS 9 -16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/28/2015 3:38:00 PM
Creation date
10/14/2015 3:54:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
11/3/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
11 ATTACHMENTS 9-16
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
270
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
- . E hi;bit 3 <br /> EXHIBIT G, <br /> c. PUD-25,Lund Ranch II Draft EIR Scoping Session <br /> Public scoping session for the Draft Environmental Impact Report(EIR)for <br /> PUD-25,the application of Greenbriar Homes for MD rezoning and <br /> development plan approval to allow the construction of I50 single-family <br /> detached homes on the approximately 195-acre Lund Ranch Il property located at <br /> 1500 Lund Ranch Road.The purpose of this public meeting is to gather public <br /> comment pertaining to the scope and content of the LIR only for this proposal. <br /> The actual proposed project would be considered by the Planning Commission at <br /> a later date. <br /> Mr. Iserson presented the staff report,and summarized the history and scope of this <br /> project.The original application submitted included 113 single-family homes,and staff <br /> determined that an Environmental Impact Report was necessary for the project. When the <br /> City Council approved the EIR consultant contract,the Council directed that an <br /> alternative plan be developed which would include more affordable housing and could <br /> include an increased number of lots. Greenbriar responded with the 150-lot plan with 16 <br /> BMR units.The EIR would be geared toward the larger plan,but would explain the <br /> environmental differences between the two. <br /> In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Arkin,the 113-unit project would have some <br /> affordable housing proposed,but it would be a fairly small percentage.No affordable <br /> housing plans had been submitted for either alternative. <br /> • Mr. Iserson stressed that there would be no decisions made by the Planning Commission <br /> tonight,nor would there be any significant discussion of the project per se. The purpose <br /> of the meeting was for the Planning Commission and the public to provide input into the <br /> Draft EIR so that the consultant may have direction with respect to area of study.He <br /> noted that there were many rolling hills,swales,and watercourses,which carried their <br /> own environmental issues in terms of biology,vegetation,and wildlife.The project is <br /> located next to several existing residential developments,which may create potential <br /> impacts such as traffic,views,and visibility. <br /> Mr. Iserson advised that the property was identified in the General Plan as 58 acres of <br /> Low-Density Residential. 123 acres of Rural Density Residential,and 13.5 acres of <br /> Public Health& Safety. <br /> The environmental issues identified by staff include: <br /> I. Conformity with the General Plan: <br /> 2. Density; <br /> 3. Development areas; <br /> 4. Impacts on surrounding areas,such as traffic,views,vegetation(including <br /> heritage trees); <br /> 5. Geologic and geotechnic issues,such as grading,seismic concerns.and <br /> landslides; <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 24,2003 EXCERPTS <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.