My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
071911
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/12/2011 2:56:42 PM
Creation date
7/12/2011 2:56:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
7/19/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
01
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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).
View images
View plain text
Site 11: Kiewit <br /> This is a triangular site at Busch and Valley Avenue. This was often sited with the other two in <br /> terms of concentration in the area. Twelve comments were received and specifically fairly <br /> evenly distributed between positives and negatives, and included comments about negative <br /> impacts on traffic, the need to be buffered from the transfer station if anything were developed <br /> there, overcrowded schools, arid the fact that the site is too big. <br /> Site 12: Goodnight Inn — Planning Commission Encouraged the Task Force to Remove Site <br /> from List <br /> This site is currently a motel on Santa Rita Road and five comments were received at the <br /> community meeting and several comments were received at the Housing Task Force, the <br /> Housing Commission, and at the Planning Commission from those living in the one and two- <br /> story single family homes in the Danbury Park area. A couple of comments generally related to <br /> traffic and also specific impacts of development on that site if 3 or 4 stories are looked at <br /> because there are single family homes adjacent to, behind the site, and to the west and to the <br /> north, although there is commercial to the south. Other comments included "too small a site, <br /> needs adequate setbacks from existing residential, overcrowded schools, negative impact on <br /> existing residents there." A couple of comments from the Planning Commission meeting related <br /> to the site not being a good one for multi-family development because anybody living there <br /> would need to cross Santa Rita Road to go to the park. <br /> The Planning Commission commented on the site extensively and their general consensus was <br /> that they encouraged the task force to remove the site from the list. <br /> Site 13: CM Capital Properties <br /> This site had a number of comments both from one or two adjacent commercial neighbors in the <br /> Hacienda Business Park, but mostly from the park site development across the Arroyo, about <br /> the fact that they had noise impacts from the sports park and they felt they would also be <br /> subject to negative impacts from housing which would be behind them there. Comments <br /> included "park site area is already too congested with activities in the park; bad location across <br /> from Had Middle School because of crime and drug problems; negative impact on home values; <br /> overcrowded schools; too close to the creek; will limit the type of tenants that can locate nearby <br /> (commercial owner comments who wanted to make sure there were not restrictions placed on <br /> uses they could have in their commercial property because of the nearby residential)." Several <br /> comments included items to consider if the site were developed, such as allowing the same <br /> number of stories that would be allowed on the commercial development, allowing only one <br /> story or two stories, mitigating the visual impact to landscaping and with stepping back the <br /> upper stories from the creek area. There were some suggestions on how the site could be <br /> developed if it could be stepped back from the Arroyo if additional landscaping were provided. <br /> Site 14: Legacy Partners <br /> This site is 12 acres off of Busch Road, slightly to the east of the Kiewit site. The part of the site <br /> shown is that within the overgrowth boundary and the City limits, as well. Nine comments were <br /> received, the majority of which were positive: "good site for housing at the edge of the City with <br /> plenty of land for mixed use potential; too big and too many sites in one area; negative impact <br /> on traffic." <br /> The Planning Commission talked about the site and was concerned that the City has committed <br /> to a specific plan for this area and they felt there was merit in the argument that there was a <br /> concentration in this area, but for now, wanted the site kept on the list. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 6 of 19 May 3, 2011 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.