My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11 ATTACHMENTS 02-04
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
101513
>
11 ATTACHMENTS 02-04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2013 4:21:34 PM
Creation date
10/9/2013 4:21:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/15/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
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
DRAFT <br /> Agency and the third lake, Lake H, is currently owned by the Pleasanton Gravel <br /> Company but is scheduled to be dedicated upon completion of reclamation to Zone 7 <br /> sometime later next year. <br /> Mr. Rasmussen stated that, as he had indicated earlier, there are a number of features <br /> of the plan area that are pretty much fixed and show up similarly in all of the options. <br /> He indicated that some office, business uses and potentially lake front retail areas such <br /> as restaurants are being proposed to the north at the top boundary of the plan area. He <br /> stated that there is a three-acre site located at the crossing of the lakes which is being <br /> called a destination use area that might accommodate some sort of conference facility <br /> or special restaurant or some sort of use that would be unique to this area in this <br /> location with the views out in all directions that are really quite nice. He continued that <br /> going down through the plan area, non-residential uses are being proposed in two areas <br /> which are both in the Airport Protection Area (APA) which does not allow for residential <br /> use. He indicated that these would primarily be business uses as well as a park and a <br /> school area. He stated that APA deals with noise and single-family residences and <br /> people sleeping at night. Continuing down the proposed extension of El Charro Road, <br /> Mr. Rasmussen noted a community park site to the east that is shown on all the plans. <br /> He indicated that a leisure park site is currently proposed and has great views on out <br /> toward the lakes. He added that it is a fairly rich habitat area from the standpoint of <br /> existing vegetation and provides some really good opportunities for trails and vistas and <br /> such. He added that also to the east of El Charro Road, all the plans show industrial <br /> land because it really does not provide an opportunity for residential, and there is not a <br /> demand for retail or more demand for office; additionally, right next to it is the Vulcan <br /> quarry plant that has some fairly substantial impacts on the surrounding areas. <br /> Mr. Rasmussen stated that the rest of the site narrowed down quite a bit to the southern <br /> end of the area west of the proposed El Charro Road extension. He noted that within <br /> that area, all the plans call for an extension of Busch Road through to connect to the <br /> new El Charro Road. He noted that there was a lot of concern by the neighbors, the <br /> Task Force, staff, and consultants about the amount of traffic that could potentially <br /> come through Busch Road, so fortunately, there is an opportunity for a connection down <br /> at Boulder Street with an existing traffic signal at its intersection with Valley Avenue. He <br /> indicated that on this plan, Boulder Street extends through and connects up to Busch <br /> Road so that it could bring in traffic from take it on out without having to go down Busch <br /> Road next to the existing neighborhoods.. He noted that this is a good opportunity to <br /> help out with the traffic situation. <br /> Mr. Rasmussen stated that the unique characteristics of the Preferred Plan that sets it <br /> apart from the other plans is that it has a "dispersed multi-family" where there are <br /> several areas of multi-family dwellings at both 30 units per acre and at 23 units per acre; <br /> and a variation of single-family development at 4 units per acre in the outlying areas, <br /> next to the existing residential neighborhood, and extending over into another area <br /> lower down, some at 8 dwelling units per acre above and tending to surround the <br /> multi-family area and all through down to the south of the project, and some at 11 units <br /> DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 9/25/2013 Page 4 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.