My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 092309
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
PC 092309
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:41:17 PM
Creation date
1/28/2010 10:42:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/23/2009
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.
/
34
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
Commissioner Narum requested clarification that the PUD modification for the Business <br />Park is where a lot of concerns she has with the Negative Declaration would actually be <br />addressed. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that it is likely this would be the case; however, a few concerns may <br />have to wait until a project came forward. <br />Commissioner Narum stated that if the Commission felt that the park standard is not up <br />to what it wants, and if all three properties had high-density housing to the point where <br />you would almost need to set aside a piece of land somewhere, it appears this would <br />need to be addressed in the Business Park PUD modification as opposed to one of the <br />individual parcels where a piece of the property would gave to be set aside for a park. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that he thinks the overall PUD process would be forced to anticipate <br />the scenario that would create that demand. <br />Commissioner Narum inquired if the point in time the School District would indicate that <br />it can or cannot handle the number of students that the development is expected to <br />generate would be at the time when the rezoning is approved, the PUD for the Business <br />Park is modified, or the individual PUDs start coming in. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that the school issue is a difficult one in all communities because <br />everybody perceives that their school cannot handle more growth. He stated that in this <br />case, based on recent events, there are situations of bigger classroom sizes; <br />unfortunately, the expectation that boundaries among schools are not adjusted in <br />response to development is probably unrealistic. He noted that this happens in every <br />community and that families are affected by it. He added that while this is not ideal, if <br />this is part of the equation, there is a lot of lead time to gear up for it so that a likely <br />solution can be found if there is a particular school with an issue. <br />Commissioner Narum inquired whether or not the Commission could add a condition to <br />the PUD that prior to building, the School District would have to evaluate the situation. <br />Mr. Dolan replied that the School District must respond to those children who show up <br />for school and not vice versa. <br />Mr. Roush clarified that in the early 1990’s when the School District and the City were <br />attempting to determine how many schools would be needed for eventual build-out of <br />the City, it was assumed that ten elementary schools would be needed, three middle <br />schools, and two high schools of an expanded nature.He continued that as a result of <br />that, there was a nexus study done in terms of how much money would have to be <br />collected as residential property developed such that the facilities would be in place <br />when the children arrived. He noted that this process continued for 15 or more years, <br />and when growth seemed to slow significantly in the early 2000, the School District <br />made a decision not to build a tenth elementary school, although this is still within its <br />Master Plan. He added that presumably, given the amount of growth, this may cause <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 23, 2009 Page 15 of 34 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.