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
developments which do not comply with ADA, they routinely accommodate residents with special <br /> requirements like this because it is just good business. <br /> Councilmember Pentin shared several other concerns, stating that he preferred for the applicant to <br /> install natural as opposed to synthetic grass over the podium parking area. He also shared the Vice <br /> Mayor's concern over the connection from Iron Horse Trail and said he was always led to believe that <br /> this property would be responsible for improvements at the intersection. He acknowledged that cost is a <br /> factor and asked staff to address what modifications, if any, can be made here. <br /> Mr. Tassano acknowledged that staff has looked at improvements here, though not necessarily as part <br /> of this particular project. As part of the Pedestrian Bicycle Master Plan, staff and several consulting <br /> engineers studied the intersection to try and identify solutions. The current design, with two right hand <br /> turn lanes, is not usually an ideal pedestrian situation. At that time, staff considered installing a pork <br /> chop island to provide pedestrians with at least some refuge and ultimately conditioned Ponderosa <br /> Homes to build the $1 million modification. Subsequent review, however, revealed that the existing <br /> retaining wall which extends almost all the way up to the westbound movement doesn't allow sufficient <br /> visibility of the vehicles. Staff determined that the modification did not improve safety enough to allow for <br /> pedestrian crossing and looked into constructing a new retaining wall. The cost for the two pedestrian <br /> improvements was approximately $3 million, which staff felt was not the most efficient use of funds. <br /> Ultimately the master plan abandoned thoughts of improving the intersection and decided to focus on <br /> extending Iron Horse Trail further down towards Shadow Cliffs as part of the East Pleasanton Specific <br /> Plan. <br /> Councilmember Pentin stated his support for the project. <br /> Councilmember Brown acknowledged the difficulties of increased traffic on this side of town, which is <br /> obviously the result of new development. She noted that in selecting sites to rezone high density, the <br /> goal was to spread the burden throughout the city. She also noted that increased traffic congestion is <br /> not, per the settlement agreement, a valid reason to block to development and therefore a burden that <br /> everyone must bear at some point. She shared several concerns she discussed with staff that relate to <br /> the number of retail parking spaces and children playing in the arroyo near the development, but said <br /> that staff has reassured her on both points. She referred to Condition of Approval No. 127 and said she <br /> hoped the developer does not elect to install pellet stoves or other wood burning devices in the project. <br /> She said the project did an excellent job of meeting the city's green building guidelines, achieving a total <br /> of 139 points where only 50 are required. She thanked the applicant for limiting the hours of commercial <br /> operation and for commissioning an EMF study related to the adjacent PG&E substation, which found <br /> the emissions to be significantly less than what is considered safe by professional organizations. With <br /> regard to the construction of affordable housing units versus the in lieu fee, she said she would support <br /> a decision in favor of the in lieu fee tonight. <br /> Commissioner Narum said she first reviewed this project at the Planning Commission workshop and is <br /> pleased with how it has evolved. She said she liked the current proposal for the retail corner as well as <br /> the condition that this and other landscaping improvements be completed concurrent with the residential <br /> development. She said she appreciated the flexibility in the Affordable Housing Agreement and the <br /> applicant's willingness to provide 3 accessible units regardless of which option is chosen, but also that <br /> she would like to see what the remaining projects coming forward yield in terms of units and funds <br /> before making a decision. She said she believed some of the concerns expressed regarding traffic are <br /> legitimate but also that the Stoneridge extension would mitigate those concerns considerably. She <br /> agreed that at least a portion of the traffic fees should be used for El Charro if ever built but said she <br /> would not support earmarking those funds until they know what the project would look like or what the <br /> development's fair share would be. She asked that staff look into addressing Mr. Russman's concerns <br /> over vegetation. She disagreed with staff regarding the installation of artificial turf, noted that it is a <br /> City Council Minutes Page 8 of 10 August 6, 2013 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.