SR 06:033 - Laserfiche WebLink

In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding enforcement of traffic laws on private streets, Ms. Nerland noted that if private security guards or private citizens called the Police Department to report a traffic violation, the Police Department has several ways to handle that situation. However, they do not issue citations based on someone claiming to have seen an illegal movement, including if that person was employed by a private security firm; there would be legal due process issues in that case. A traffic citation is not typically issued unless the police officer observes the misconduct. There are times when the Police Department may follow up on a complaint by calling the subject of the complaint to bring the matter to his or her attention. A discussion of public accessibility to several private roads in Pleasanton ensued. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding whether there was any way to tell where private streets start and end, Wes lost replied that in most cases, the City tries to indicate private streets with a regular driveway-type inlet. There are some streets that were built many years ago that look like public streets but are typically narrower than public streets. A typically well-informed Pleasanton resident may not know it was a private street; although, there may be a sign posted indicating that the street is private. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding whether there was any mechanism that obligated Hacienda Park to provide private security services in this area, Ms. Nerland believed it would be part of the original development agreement, but she did not have that documentation with her. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding enforcement of parking violations by a witnessing police officer, Ms. Nerland replied that a moving violation may not be enforced on a private street but that the office may speak to the violator. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Mei Schaninger, 5080 Rigatti Circle, expressed concern about this use with respect to traffic safety and believed this use would make the traffic worse. She believed the traffic associated with the day care would pose a safety hazard tD the neighborhood children. Steve Bursley, 5085 Rigatti Circle, displayed the layout of the neighborhood on the overhead screen and described the ingress and egress to the neighborhood in relation to the day care. He opposed the addition of more traffic while there was an existing traffic problem and did not see the private security very often. He noted that he had measured the street in several areas and found that in some places they were narrower than 32 feet wide and slightly wider in other areas. He believed that many of the neighbors were very concerned about quality oflife, which would be impacted by additional traffic. Amir Abdul, 5255 Genovesio Drive, spoke in opposition to this item and was very concerned about the safety issues posed by additional traffic. Vilas Thuse, applicant, noted that he and his wife had performed significant due diligence before the hearing. He noted that while they had been operating the licensed small family day care for EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, August 10, 2005 Page 2 of 4