My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
10
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2014
>
121614
>
10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/27/2015 11:38:48 AM
Creation date
12/10/2014 11:26:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/16/2014
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
10
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
alongside a very busy, high-speed street. One of these installations is directly comparable <br /> to Young Ivy's proposal, i.e., it is in the utility zone to the rear of the shopping center <br /> where it is located,which backs up to residential units. To argue then that this is not <br /> appropriate either on the safety issue OR on the noise issue is not reasonable from the <br /> perspective of comparables. <br /> In his statement to the Commission, the Oak Hills Shopping Center was <br /> characterized by Mr. Luchini as a"quiet zone." To the contrary,some degree of noise is <br /> inherent in the conduct of commercial activity. We respectfully suggest that shopping <br /> centers—at least equally with business parks—are not"quiet zones,"but zones where the <br /> noise of vehicles,people,etc.,are part of everyday business. As testament to that fact,we <br /> note the placement of a 9-foot sound wall separating the utility/parking area behind the <br /> Oak Hills Shopping Center from local residential units. At nine feet, this wall is in fact <br /> higher than sound walls at comparable play area installations. Would this wall have been <br /> built if this were a"quiet zone?" <br /> Had we been given an opportunity to rebut the arguments of the Commissioners, <br /> we would have done so, but we were denied.We would have been willing to accept <br /> restrictions on the hours of use of the play area,e.g., from n a.m.to 5 p.m.,which would <br /> be in accord with business park hours of operation, but we were denied the opportunity. <br /> We are willing to add features that enhance safety(a heightened curb on the street side, <br /> and bollards flanking both corners),but we are told that it will not make any difference, <br /> our proposal will be denied. The undersigned has been told verbally in conversations <br /> with Mr. Luchini that"no matter what changes [we] make,the Commission will not <br /> approve. <br /> n <br /> The refusal of the Commission to provide a transparent process and to deny us <br /> specific parameters of the"noise"they find objectionable, begs consideration of the <br /> question of appropriate process, and perhaps some consideration of the question of racial <br /> discrimination as well. Sixteen or fewer children playing in a circumscribed,monitored <br /> play area are not likely to produce enough noise to warrant this negative decision from <br /> the Commission. <br /> R• .ec . II / bmitted, <br /> If Ili <br /> /l/its, <br /> ary L. • ene <br /> fo Young Ivy <br /> attachments: text of November 12 presentation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.