My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
RES 231357
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2020-present
>
2023
>
RES 231357
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2023 11:18:56 AM
Creation date
2/16/2023 1:11:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
1/26/2023
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
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.
/
274
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
City of Pleasanton 2023-2031 (6th Cycle) Housing Element Update <br />Final EIR Errata <br /> <br /> <br />FirstCarbon Solutions 3-27 <br />https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480022/EIR/4 - Final EIR/21480022 Sec03-00 Errata.docx <br />school facilities are not cumulatively considerable and the cumulative impact would be less <br />than significant. <br />Page 3.13-40, Third Full Paragraph <br />To provide clarification, the following paragraph has been revised: <br />Other Public Facilities <br />The geographic context for analysis of cumulative impacts to other public facilities includes <br />the city limits. Development and growth in the city would increase demand for other public <br />facilities. A significant cumulative environmental impact would result if cumulative growth <br />exceeded the ability of the City to adequately serve people within their service area, thereby <br />requiring construction of new facilities or modification of existing facilities. All cumulative <br />projects would be required to comply with City ordinances and other policies that address <br />other public facilities, including payment of the capital facilities fee. Therefore, cumulative <br />impacts would be less than significant. <br />Section 3.14—Transportation <br />Page 3.14-9, Last Paragraph <br />In response to ALAMEDA CTC-1, the following paragraph has been revised: <br />Table 3.14-1 provides the VMT estimate for Alameda County from the Alameda County <br />Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC) Model. The Alameda CTC Model includes data <br />from February of 2020, which represents conditions prior to the COVID-19 pandemic; which <br />is a conservative approach to the modeling volumes. The latest version of the Countywide <br />Travel Model, updated in May 2019, uses 2010 as a base year to forecast 2020 conditions. <br />Pages 3.14-25 and 3.14-26, Mitigation Measure TRANS-2 <br />To specify timing with respect to implementation of MM TRANS-2, it has been revised. This revision <br />is a minor modification and does not change the analysis or significance of any of the environmental <br />issue conclusions within the Draft Program EIR. <br />Mitigation Measures <br />MM TRANS-2 Implement Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduction Measures. <br />Prior to the issuance of entitlements for a project certificate of occupancy, a project <br />applicants for an individual housing project development proposals that does not <br />screen out from Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) impact analysis, as determined by a <br />qualified consultant using the methods applied in this Draft Program EIR, with <br />modifications as necessary (e.g., to account for project-specific information and/or <br />to reflect future updates to the Alameda Countywide Travel Demand [Alameda CTC] <br />Model and/or other methodologies acceptable to the City), shall provide a <br />quantitative VMT analysis using the methods applied in this Draft Program EIR, with <br />modifications as necessary (e.g., to account for project-specific information and/or <br />to reflect future updates to the Alameda Countywide Travel Demand [Alameda CTC]
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.