My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
RES 06035
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
RES 06035
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/7/2006 4:17:08 PM
Creation date
6/7/2006 4:02:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
5/16/2006
DOCUMENT NO
RES 06035
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.
/
377
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
<br />Chapter 5 <br />Alternatives to the Project <br /> <br />The scenic vistas visual criterion relates to landscaping as well as to structures, given the <br />possibility that vegetation on the site could obscure important scenic vistas. The Specific <br />Plan Land Use Element (Open Space Policy 1, p. 20) calls for siting community facilities <br />along Bernal Avenue and 1-680 to achieve a pleasing open view into the site, to retain key <br />vistas eastward across the site to the southeast hills and westward across the site to <br />Pleasanton Ridge. Of these points, the applicable consideration is the siting of buildings <br />along 1-680. None of the orientation points addresses the visibility of the CAC from the <br />freeway; however, if that location were to be chosen, it would be important that the design of <br />the CAC not present an unattractive appearance (such as by rooftop equipment detracting <br />from the architectural impression of the project, or by excessive or inadequately screened or <br />landscaped parking areas that might diminish the scale and drama ofthe complex). <br /> <br />With that consideration stated, it is concluded that, taking the policy guidance for both <br />natural and built elements of the Plan into consideration, it is unlikely that Alternative 2 <br />would result in an adverse effect on scenic vistas. <br /> <br />No significant effects on aesthetics and visual resources have been identified for Alternative <br />2; therefore, no mitigation measures are needed. <br /> <br />b. Agricultural Resources <br /> <br />The assessment of impacts on agricultural resources presented in Chapter 4 also applies to <br />Alternatives 1 and 2. <br /> <br />c. Air Quality <br /> <br />The assessment of impacts on air quality presented in Chapter 4 also applies to Alternatives <br />1 and 2. <br /> <br />d. Biological Resources <br /> <br />The assessment of impacts on biological resources presented in Chapter 4 also applies to <br />Alternatives 1 and 2. <br /> <br />e. Cultural Resources <br /> <br />The assessment of impacts on cultural resources presented in Chapter 4 also applies to <br />Alternatives 1 and 2. <br /> <br />f. Geology, Soils, and Seismicity <br /> <br />The assessment of impacts on geology, soils, and seismicity presented in Chapter 4 also <br />applies to Alternatives 1 and 2. <br /> <br />175 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.