Laserfiche WebLink
<br />s.... MATTERS CONTINUED FOR DECISION <br />There were none. <br /> <br />6. PUBLIC HEARINGS <br /> <br />a. GP-94-1. Citv of Pleasanton <br />City initiated General Plan Amendment to clarify tI'affic study requiI'ements as they <br />relate to site specific traffic studies for major developments which have the potential to <br />exceed the level of Service (LOS) designation of "D." The Planning Commission will <br />also consider approval of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact prepared for <br />the project. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift presented the staff report regarding the clarification of the traffic circulation policy <br />when traffic studies are done for major projects. This is an outgrowth of the lawsuit between <br />Dublin and Pleasanton over the previous approval of Hacienda Business Park. When <br />approving the development plan for Hacienda Business Park, the City had determined the <br />traffic study done at the time was done as if Hacienda Business Park was one project. The <br />City determined it to be sufficient for the entire project at that time. The approval of this <br />application will give the City the flexibility to do only one traffic study, and it will be so <br />clarified in the General Plan. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner Barker, Mr. Swift commented that the City had given Hacienda <br />Business Park approval of their original traffic study, and has subsequently reviewed and <br />approved traffic studies completed in association of all new buildings built in the Park. In <br />future applications, however, site-specific traffic studies will not be part of the approval <br />process. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED <br /> <br />No one spoke for or against this application. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner McGuirk's inquiry about the traffic model, Mr. Swift stated <br />that every year the model is updated into the "existing traffic scenario," therefore, if traffic <br />patterns change throughout the year, they are incorporated into the traffic model. <br /> <br />Commissioner Barker inquired if the traffic study should be reviewed by the General Plan <br />Steering Committee. Mr. Swift advised the Steering Committee had been contacted <br />regarding the amendment. <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner Dove, Mr. Swift advised that if a situation arose with Dublin's <br />street traffic that could impact Pleasanton's traffic, that situation would be added to <br />Pleasanton's traffic model. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />August 31, 1994 <br />