My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 080900
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
PC 080900
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
8/1/2001 5:40:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/9/2000
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 080900
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
Discussion ensued regarding the construction ora soundberm with a wall. Commissioner Arkin, <br />Commissioner Maas, and Chair Roberts voice support for the berm only. Commissioner <br />Sullivan stated that he supports the berm with a wall. <br /> <br />The Commission agreed that a berm should be located next to the freeway rather than next to <br />houses and that the berm should have some modulation. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sullivan recommended that in order to mitigate the removal of trees in the knoll <br />area, a tree survey be done and the value be determined for the trees that will be removed. He <br />further suggested that the trees that are removed from the knoll area be replaced with mature <br />trees or a contribution made to a replacement Urban Forestry Fund. The Commission agreed. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding the EIR and the mitigation regarding the removal of trees. Mr. <br />Swift stated that the mitigation requirement could be added in the Specific Plan and/or in the <br />PUD Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Sullivan noted that he would like to see some trees <br />planted in the area at the bottom of the knoll. <br /> <br />Chai~n Roberts noted that she believes a connection as shown as street "W" to Bernal <br />Avenue is necessary. The Commission agreed. <br /> <br />Commissioner M~s~ questioned the performance standard addressing the TSM component. It <br />was agreed that there should be strict adherence to the TSM objectives. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sullivan noted that he has major concerns about going from Alternative B to C in <br />that this will be a totally different project. He noted that he would like to see other steps taken if <br />the process gets to the point where Alternative C is considered. Commissioner M~ noted that <br />she can support Alternatives A and B, but she would want Alternative C to come back to the <br />Comwdssion. Chairperson Roberts concurred. Discussion ensued regarding developing options <br />to Alternative C. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS REOPENED <br /> <br />Mr. Costanzo stated that due to the need to obtain financing, Greenbriar needs to know the <br />Alternative and cannot have this left opened-ended. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding the development of Alternative C-1 which would be created by <br />moving the 5,000-square-foot lots that were relocated from the Eastern Area to the Central Area, <br />to the property south of the commercial area, separated by a bem~. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sullivan agreed with this proposal, recommending that all avenues be explored <br />prior to Alternative C being pursued. <br /> <br />PLANNING COIvIMISSION MINUTES August 9, 2000 Page 18 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.