My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 101409
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
PC 101409
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:41:23 PM
Creation date
1/28/2010 10:43:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/14/2009
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.
/
25
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
Mr. Pavan replied that the Commission has the flexibility to determine the parking ratio <br />for a PUD, based upon several factors, including the ability to serve the types of uses <br />proposed, hours of operation, etc. He added that the parking analysis is part of the <br />traffic report. <br />Commissioner Olson noted that staff appears to be still not in favor of the fueling station <br />and inquired why it was moved. <br />Mr. Pavan replied that if the fuel station is ultimately supported by the City, staff wants <br />to ensure that it is attractive and complements the area and that its location does not <br />conflict with the circulation on Bernal Avenue or between Bernal Avenue and the <br />project. <br />Commissioner Olson recalled that at the Commission’s last meeting of May 28, 2008, <br />he raised a question regarding a development agreement for the project and inquired it <br />this agreement has been completed. He added that if this is the case, he would like the <br />Commission to review it. <br />Mr. Pavan replied that there is an existing development agreement on the property <br />which covers the previously approved project and which must be modified to allow for <br />this project. He indicated that he would forward copies of the existing agreement to the <br />Commission. <br />Commissioner Blank stated that this would be of value because the Commission may <br />want to review the proposed modifications to the agreement. <br />Mr. Pavan advised that when the project is brought back for the formal <br />recommendation, the revised development agreement would be attached to the staff <br />report and would be part of the recommendation for Planning Commission action. <br />Commissioner Blank recommended that the agreement be forwarded to the <br />Commission prior to the recommendation being made as a development agreement will <br />override the conditions of approval. <br />Commissioner Olson stated that the Commission has experienced this with other <br />projects where the development agreement is not in sync with what the Commission <br />has recommended. He added that another item discussed at the May meeting is a <br />fiscal analysis in which staff would be evaluating the impact of these businesses on <br />other businesses in the City. He noted that the Commission had expressed concerns at <br />that meeting regarding types of businesses in the complex versus similar businesses in <br />the Downtown area to determine whether the City is setting up additional competition for <br />businesses that are keeping the Downtown area viable. He inquired if this study has <br />been done. <br />Mr. Pavan replied that the fiscal analysis is underway and will be provided to the <br />Commission along with other supporting documents. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 14, 2009 Page 6 of 25 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.