My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC-2026-15
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2026
>
PC-2026-15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/5/2026 12:52:06 PM
Creation date
8/5/2026 12:48:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
6/24/2026
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.
/
444
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
ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT <br />ADDENDUM <br /> <br /> <br />FCS 167 <br />Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx <br />1,000 residents, the additional use by project residents would not cause the ratio to lower such that it <br />would be inconsistent with Program 10.18 of the City’s General Plan. <br />Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with the County’s Park Dedication <br />Ordinance (Chapter 12.20 of the County Code of Ordinance), the purpose of which is to assure that <br />each new residential unit in the unincorporated area bears the burden of its individual, incremental <br />share of improvements needed to accommodate the cumulative demand for park and recreation <br />facilities caused by all new residential development, and to ensure that the current level of park and <br />recreation facilities is maintained (County Code Section 12.20.030). The proposed project would be <br />required to comply with the Ordinance through a combination of on-site park dedications and a <br />payment of an in lieu fee, as set forth in an enforceable COA. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded <br />that impacts would be less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.13-15, 6-18, 6-19). <br />Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion <br />As previously stated, the City maintains approximately 385 acres of parks, translating to <br />approximately 5.09 acres per 1,000 residents, above its park service standard of 5 acres of park and <br />recreational uses per 1,000 residents. <br />Consistent with the County Project, the proposed project would still provide an approximately 0.7-acre <br />private park and approximately 0.5 mile of multiuse trails. Additionally, the proposed project would <br />provide a Public Access Easement to allow the public to use its on-site park amenities. With the <br />proposed project’s anticipated increase of approximately 588 residents 48 (slightly lower than the <br />County Project) and the inclusion of an approximately 0.7-acre private park, the ratio of parklands per <br />1,000 residents for the City would be approximately 5.06 acres per 1,000 residents. <br />However, as evaluated in the Prior FEIR, improvements identified in the City’s Parks and Recreation <br />Master Plan and General Plan were planned independent of the proposed project. The proposed <br />project would not necessitate these planned park improvements, which have already been identified, <br />planned, and analyzed at a program level. The impacts associated with the proposed on-site park <br />facilities were thoroughly evaluated in the Prior FEIR in the appropriate environmental topic areas. <br />Furthermore, the proposed project would be required to pay applicable capital facilities fees as <br />outlined in Chapter 3.22 of the Municipal Code, which would further contribute to the City’s planned <br />park facilities. Finally, the applicant would be responsible for satisfaction of the City's parkland <br />dedication requirements. Therefore, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s impact conclusion, the proposed <br />project would have a less than significant impact in this regard and, as such, would not introduce new <br />significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously <br />identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required. <br /> <br />48 (189 dwelling units + 48 junior ADUs) * 2.48 (City’s average persons per household) = approximately 588 persons
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.