My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
090313
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/29/2013 11:38:39 AM
Creation date
8/29/2013 11:38:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/3/2013
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.
/
10
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
south of the project site. These values were then distributed throughout Pleasanton's transportation <br /> network to predict what impacts to congestion and signal times might be expected. The report concluded <br /> that the addition of the project trip traffic changes the level of service at the Stanley and Valley/Bernal <br /> intersection from D to E but that this could be properly mitigated by a standard ratiming of the signals. <br /> He also noted that Stoneridge Drive extension, which significantly reduces traffic Dn Valley Avenue, will <br /> be complete before this project actually goes in. The report also found a substandard level of service at <br /> Bernal and Utah due to side street delay. While this intersection's level of service is not officially <br /> recorded with the General Plan, the project will construct a traffic signal at this lc cation to mitigate any <br /> impacts it might create. <br /> Councilmember Brown said she struggled to find the logic in the trip generation identified in the project's <br /> analysis. Specifically, she questioned how a project comprised of 345 units, mos. of which are 2 and 3 <br /> bedrooms, is expected to generate 3,800 daily car trips and only 191 of those are AM peak hour trips. <br /> Mr. Tassano explained that the apartment trip generation rate of 0.62 per unit differs from that of single <br /> family homes, which typically assume one trip per peak hour. What that indicates to him is that perhaps <br /> fewer people living in apartment complexes have an 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. job or other responsibilities that <br /> would normally tie them to a peak hour type of schedule. Councilmember 13rown asked and he <br /> confirmed that unit mix is irrelevant in terms of calculating peak hour trips. <br /> Councilmember Brown also questioned why evening peak hour trips would De nearly double the <br /> projected morning peak hour trips. Mr. Tassano explained that variations like thi.5 are not unusual and <br /> noted that with office commercial space, approximately 70% of employees arrive at 8 a.m. but 80% <br /> leave at 5 p.m. <br /> Mayor Thorne said he would be interested to know how many people take advantage of the Livermore <br /> Amador Valley Transit Authority passes that are required as part of the conditions of approval. Mr. <br /> Tassano said he spoke with James Paxson from Hacienda and he estimated that approximately 25% of <br /> the passes that are available are utilized. <br /> Mr. Dolan concluded the staff report, noting that staff supplied the Council with a memo containing <br /> several minor modifications to the conditions outlined in the staff report. These include prohibiting <br /> tobacco stores in the retail center, tying expiration of approvals to the Development Agreement as <br /> opposed to the typical 2 year term, and several requirements related to the rep)rting of disturbances. <br /> The most substantive change is an additional requirement that perimeter improvements and landscaping <br /> be completed prior to finalization of the residential portion of the project, should retail development lag <br /> behind. Staff is also proposing to reinstate the previously proposed dog run in the southeastern corner of <br /> the site near the trail connection to the arroyo. <br /> He stated that staff believes the applicant has put forth a project that in almost every way meets the <br /> standards by which the Council indicated it could accept mixed use development on the site. Staff is <br /> recommending approval of the project and asks that the Council consider the actions identified on pages <br /> 1 and 2 of the staff report. <br /> Mayor Thorne asked what the developer's total project fees would be for the developer. Mr. Fialho <br /> provided a general estimate upwards of$10 million for all fees. <br /> Mayor Thorne opened the public hearing. <br /> John Pringle, applicant, estimated fees of nearly $17 million from all entities but not including the <br /> potential affordable housing in lieu fee. He thanked City staff for working with them throughout this 10 <br /> year process. He described the task force process which helped to identify the site for rezoning and <br /> subsequent public outreach sessions conducted in the summers of 2011 and 20' 2. He felt that the 199 <br /> City Council Minutes Page 5 of 10 August 6, 2013 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.