My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC-2026-08
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2026
>
PC-2026-08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/4/2026 8:27:46 AM
Creation date
8/4/2026 8:25:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
4/22/2026
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.
/
264
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City of Pleasanton—Hidden Canyon Residences and Preserve Project <br />CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations <br /> <br /> <br />54 FirstCarbon Solutions <br />Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480016/FOF/21480016 Pleasanton Hidden Canyon Residences and Preserve Project FOF.docx <br />those mitigation measures. As such, no additional/revised mitigation measures have any significant <br />effects and the conclusions of the Draft EIR with respect to each impact section remain unchanged. <br />The Lead Agency has considered all relevant information including the opinions and comments of <br />interested agencies, organizations and individuals. The Lead Agency finds that the additional <br />mitigation does not meet the test for recirculation. Additionally, the Lead Agency finds that none of <br />the additional information provided during the public comment period demonstrates any of the <br />following situations requiring recirculation identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 have <br />occurred: <br />xx A new significant environmental impact that would result from the project (or any alternative) <br />or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented. <br />x A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless <br />mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. <br />x A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others <br />previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project <br />(or an alternative), but the project's proponents decline to adopt it. <br />x The Draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that <br />meaningful public review and comment were precluded. <br /> <br />Based on the foregoing and as explained in more detail in the Final EIR, and having reviewed all the <br />information in the record of proceedings, the Lead Agency hereby finds that this additional <br />information does not constitute significant new information nor does it require recirculation of the <br />EIR. The additional information merely clarifies or amplifies an adequate EIR. <br />1.14 - Statement of Overriding Considerations <br />CEQA requires that a Lead Agency balance the benefits of a project against its unavoidable <br />environmental risk in determining whether to approve the proposed project. If the benefits <br />outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, those effects may be considered “acceptable” pursuant to <br />CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a). CEQA requires that a Lead Agency support, in writing, the specific <br />reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are infeasible to mitigate. <br />Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the EIR or elsewhere in the administrative <br />record pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b). The Lead Agency’s written reasons are <br />referred to as a Statement of Overriding Considerations. <br />As explained in the above Findings of Fact, most of the project’s impacts on the environment would <br />either be insignificant or, through the incorporation of mitigation measures as conditions of approval <br />of the proposed project, can be reduced to less than significant. However, as set forth in Section 1.6 <br />above, impacts to VMT will remain significant and unavoidable as no mitigation measures are <br />feasible/even with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures. Further, as set forth in <br />Section 1.7 above, there are/are no feasible alternatives to the proposed project, which would <br />mitigate or avoid those environmental impacts and which would meet project objectives. <br />Accordingly, as set forth below, the City of Pleasanton hereby declares that the following benefits <br /> <br /><br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.