ORD 1280 - Laserfiche WebLink

ii. If the traffic study analysis shows any affected intersection, or intersections, would exdeed LOS D ('equal to or greater than 91% capacity), and indicates that there are no.mitigation measures, the developer can implement to improve that intersection(s) to mid-LOS D (86% of capacity), then the City shall not approve the project application; provided, however, applicant's project approval shall not be denied pursuant to this condition if the traffic study analysis shows that the traffic from future developments on San Francisco Water Department lands, Alameda County Fairgrounds or TMI property is a cause of exceeding LOS D and the City has failed to apply traffic mitigations to that future development sufficient to maintain traffic levels at better than LOS E. iii. In the event that a portion of the traffic causing the traffic level to exceed LOS D is, or will be, generated by developments on the City and County of San Francisco Water Department lands, TMI, Alameda County Fairgrounds, or other major developments in the area, the developer shall not be required to pay for more than developer's pro rata share of the cost of a mitigation measure if the City, in conjunction with the developer, is able to impose the additional cost on those other projects contributing to the cumulative traffic problem. iv. Any traffic study used by the City for purposes of this condition shall exclude traffic counts taken during the Alameda County Fair or during other major events held at the Fairgrounds. 15. The developer shall participate in the provisions of parks and recreation facilities in a manner to be determined by the City following a study of the reasonable parks and recreation needs of employees of City of Pleasanton business parks. The project's participation shall be equal to its pro rata share of the capital cost of acquiring and developing the park and recreation facilities determined to be necessary. The manner of the project's participation, whether through development fees, assessment districts or some other manner, shall be determined upon City review of the aforementioned study and shall take into consideration park and recreation needs at present and in the future by phasing necessary improvements as appropriate. The project developer shall cooperate with the City in providing said park and recreation facilities by making this obligation run with the land within the project and by cooperating in its personal capacity as an owner of property elsewhere in north Pleasanton. The City agrees to use its best efforts to assess all Pleasanton business park developers/employers on a pro rata basis for the park and recreation facilities made necessary by the business park development, and the City shall explore methods to accomplish this as part of the aforementioned study. At the time the