PC 05/11/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

r- Mike Kliment, 5152 Foothill Road, stated he and his neighbors have worked together through several meetings, and he feels a workable agreement has been achieved. He feels this agreement will solve two serious driveway problems on Foothill and asks the Commission for their vote of approval. Mr. Kliment further asked the City for some guarantee that the Foothill Road improvements will be done in a reasonable amount of time. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CWSED Commissioner Wright commented that he believes the condition requiring a road agreement be in place is not necessary because the parties have come to a tentative agreement. Commissioner Wright wants to keep the September 1, 1995, deadline. He proposed adding an option to request a nine month extension which would also require Mr. Thomas to post a bond at that time. Commissioner Hovingh inquired of staff if the City could require a bond be posted for the construction of a private street. Mr. Swift stated that it has been done in the past and was unaware of any restriction from requiring a bond for a private street. He further stated that the City has no recourse if a bond is posted but construction was never started. The City has recourse only when construction has begun and then terminated, at which point the City can use the bond money to finish the project. ~ Commissioner Mahem is in favor of extending the road improvement deadline, although she does not want to delete the deadline entirely. Commissioner Michelotti supports this application due to trade-ofts obtained in acquiring access for several properties from Foothill Road through one entrance, and the willingness of all parties to participate presently. Commissioner Hovingh supports this application reluctantly because he feels Pleasanton residents will not be happy with more houses being built along Foothill Road. Regarding the September 1, 1995 completion deadline, he is willing to compromise on the deadline as long as construction has been started by September 1, 1995. He does not want an open-ended time limit. Responding to Commissioner Mahem, Mr. Swift advised that the other lots of the project still have a valid PUD, although the tentative parcel map has lapsed and would have to be approved again by the Staff Review Board. In order to change the number of lots, the original PUD would have to be changed. Chairman McGuirk supports this project because the end result will be closing private drives on Foothill Road. He feels the fifteen month deadline is sufficient and agrees to a nine month extension if some progress has been made on the road. However, he cautioned the applicant not think he had a total of 24 months to complete his project. Plamring Commission Minutes Page 6 May t1, 1994 .. .