SR 06:242 - Laserfiche WebLink

mance with the standards of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If the Planning Commission concurs with this environmental assessment, it must make the finding that the Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate prior to recommending approval of the proposed proj ect. The IS/MND and Notice of Completion (NOC) were sent to the State Clearinghouse of the Of- fice of Planning and Research on July 19th for its CEQA review period. The State Clearing- house mandated that the 30-day review period end on August 25th, extending beyond the August 9th date stated on the ISIMND by staff. Comments were received from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) staff, resulting in the meeting on site to discuss the project's grading, urban stormwater runoff mitigation measures, etc. R WQCB staff considered the over- all proposal - grading, treatment of swales/seeps, bio-retention areas, etc. - to be sensitive to the site with its impacts redueed to a less-than-significant-level and stated to staff that from its per- spective that the project could proceed to Planning Commission. The State Clearinghouse staff stated to staff that the Planning Commission could make its recommendation before the review period ends. X. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FINDINGS The Planning Commission should make the finding that the proposed amendment to the Plea- santon General Plan - changing the land use designation from the Rural Density Residential land use designation to Low Density Residential (< 2 du/ac) land uses on 8 acres, with a maxi- mum density of 8 dwelling units, and Open Space land uses on the remaining 22 acres - con- forms to the applicable policies and standards of the Pleasanton General Plan for hillside devel- opment. Staff suggests: . The eight lots are grouped into a cluster aceessed from a single public street and sur- rounded on three sides by permanent open space, . The applicant's offer to convey the 22-acre open space area to the City as permanent open space would be considered an amenity benefiting the City and surrounding neighborhoods as well as the proposed project. . Land uses and densities are consistent with the densities of adjoining and nearby devel- opments, including the Jorgensen Lane development on the south side of the subjeet property and the Laguna Oaks development on the east side of Foothill Road, and with the open space character of the areas surrounding the property. XI. PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINDINGS The Pleasanton Municipal Code sets forth the purposes of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) District and the considerations to be addressed in reviewing a PUD development plan proposal. The Planning Commission must make the following findings that the proposed PUD develop- ment plan conforms to the purposes of the PUD District, before making its recommendation. Item 6.c., PUD-58 and PGPA-I 1 Page 30 of 34 August 23, 2006