My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 081308
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
PC 081308
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:37:57 PM
Creation date
9/17/2009 10:51:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/13/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
<br />Chair Blank noted that all referencesmentions to “homeowner association”Home <br />Owners Associations need to be changed to “mMaintenance aAssociation” sand that <br />some additional administrative duties would need to be performed by the <br />maintenance associationMA. <br /> <br />Mr. Pavan indicated that while Condition No. 49 was not standard, it was already <br />being employed successfully. He then pointed out where the previously mentioned <br />parking bays were located and where the curbs might need to be built. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson inquired about on the current location of the gate and its <br />intended future location. Mr. Pavan pointeds out the two locations and confirmeds <br />that the gate will still be located prior to arrival at at the first lot. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson then asked Mr. Pavan for clarification regarding securing <br />agency permits as explained on page 19 of the sStaff rReport. . Mr. Pavan replied <br />that hypothetically, if the applicant is unable to secure the permits necessary from <br />three agencies to complete the construction of the bike lane, the Ccity would then be <br />responsible for securing those permits and provide for mitigation. He added that the <br />City would require a bond to included sufficient funds to do so. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson inquired why sStaff thinks that the City would be able to get the <br />permits from the three agencies if the applicant is unable to do so. <br /> <br />Mr. Pavan replied that stated that it is the sStaff believes that, based on a review of <br />the area, while it is technically a creek area,, it is not a habitat area. He added that <br />the area hwas already been modified, and contains sandbags, poison oak, and other <br />debris. He noted that based on the mitigation measures done in the past, sStaff <br />believes that it is highly probable that the permits can be secured and the mitigation <br />measures achieved. Mr. Pavan then reiterateds that if the applicant fails to secure <br />the permits, the City will wants to have the money on hand to pursue the permits and <br />mitigation itself. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson inquired if construction of the bike lane would result in filling <br />that area so water could notcannot pass through during a storm. Mr. Pavan replied <br />that a culvert could be constructed to aid in the passing of water. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor raised the point that at the workshop, the Commission had <br />asked for a traffic safety analysis that would include several variations for entryway <br />from Foothill Road. He noted that the sStaff rReport did not include the safety <br />analysis and that there is only one location for possible entry access. <br /> <br />Mr. Pavan explained that while the analysis was not included in the report, a safety <br />analysis of possible access locations was conducted. He added that the analysis <br />was done in consultation with the City Engineer, the Traffic Engineer, and <br />consultants, who concluded that the entrance proposed satisfies the request for a <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 13, 2008 Page 8 of 26 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.