My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 071421
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2021
>
PC 071421
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/26/2021 11:50:36 AM
Creation date
8/26/2021 11:50:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/14/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
near the elementary school and children walking along that stretch, possibly in the street, and <br /> agreed with the public comments requesting the sidewalk be completed as expeditiously as <br /> possible. He expressed concern that the time for completion was not stated in the COAs, <br /> which should be determined as a mandatory condition for the project. <br /> Commissioner Pace concurred and further stated the goal was to represent the community <br /> and consider the community's feedback. <br /> Commissioner Morgan noted he did not have additional comments outside the sidewalk issue, <br /> which was already raised. <br /> Chair Brown referenced the written public comments received, noting the current sidewalk on <br /> Dennis Drive, the sidewalk on the northern side starting out of nowhere, which should continue <br /> from the south to the east and continue around, which would be in everyone's interest. He <br /> expressed concern about the allocations made in 2006 creating the existing incomplete <br /> sidewalk condition and increased construction costs. Ms. Amos stated the subdivision <br /> agreement would include language regarding the sidewalk requirements and indicated the <br /> intent of the condition for the installation of the sidewalk and widening the roadway to be <br /> complete prior to the home construction. Chair Brown discussed the need to widen the road. <br /> He expressed concern about safety and stated he wanted the sidewalk constructed and road <br /> widened prior to construction of the house. He expressed concern with the 15-year delay on <br /> the sidewalk improvements required for 3520 Dennis Drive and inquired whether the City could <br /> tie the work into the CIP project and whether they could commit the funds prior to the CIP <br /> project. <br /> Ms. Clark stated the owner of 3520 Dennis Drive had met their obligation in paying the in-lieu <br /> fee at the time, and it would not be a reasonable requirement for the current applicants to <br /> improve the frontage in areas outside of their project responsibility. She stated the sidewalk <br /> gap closure could be included in a CIP project, but that it would be problematic to constrain the <br /> timing of the projects under consideration to an action to be taken by the City. Assistant City <br /> Attorney Julie Harryman suggested the Commission recommend the City Council work to <br /> expedite the project. City Traffic Engineer Mike Tassano explained that the City was waiting for <br /> development of the two vacant properties to start construction on the sidewalk, knowing the <br /> fees were paid for 3520 Dennis Drive. He noted his design preference would be to replace the <br /> existing rolled curb with a standard non-rolled curb. Chair Brown stated he noticed the rolled <br /> curb and agreed that there was reduced visual spacing of asphalt as with a square curb. He <br /> inquired about the sidewalk, noting the measurement was currently about four feet in width and <br /> inquired if the requested five feet was to meet the standard or the purpose. Mr. Tassano <br /> stated five feet was the current standard. Chair Brown suggested a strong message to the City <br /> Council that the CIP needed to be approved to complete the sidewalk. <br /> Commissioner Allen asked if the required funds could be requested as an amenity. Ms. Clark <br /> referenced the agenda report regarding the history of the project and approval of annexation <br /> by the City Council, not requiring additional amenities. She reiterated that 3520 Dennis Drive <br /> had met their obligation in paying the in-lieu fee. She suggested an option for the two projects <br /> to complete the improvements, with the City reimbursing the applicants for the cost. <br /> Commissioner Allen suggested information on the cost to complete the CIP in conjunction with <br /> the two projects. Ms. Amos explained the need to pay prevailing wages if City monies were <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 10 July 14, 2021 <br />