My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 052505
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
PC 052505
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:21:01 PM
Creation date
3/9/2006 9:27:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/25/2005
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 052505
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding the contents of the video, <br />Ms. Decker replied that three dates were given for taping: May 4, May K, and May 24. Short <br />clips showed the drop-off and pick-up patterns; there were two incidences of parents parking the <br />wrong way as described, two incidences of apparent speeding by drivers that did not appear to be <br />customers, and one incident of a resident making a U-turn on the street. She believed the <br />pick-up and drop-off appeared to be fairly standard_ <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding traffic-calming nzeas ures, <br />Ms. Nerland stated that the Fire Department did not support speed bumps on residential streets. <br />Ms_ Decker added that traffic-calming measures were generally associated with certain levels of <br />service; this street had a LOS A and would not be impacted to need a reduction_ <br />in response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts regarding possible enforcement if these <br />conditions were not met, Ms. Nerland replied that trati-ic enforcement would be addressed by the <br />Police Department. The standards for granting a conditional use permit were generally lower <br />than to modify or revoke it for cause because it becomes a right that runs with the land. <br />Chairperson Maas noted that the phone numbers for large fancily daycares were generally <br />available. She added that with respect to noise cnforcem ent issues, it would be possible [~~r a <br />blended family to have up to 14 children but would not have the same car trafFc for pick-up and <br />drop-off. She believed that ttaff c and safety issues for the neighborhood should be the primary <br />concern for the Commission. <br />Commissioner Roberts suggested that the traffic issues be re-visited in six months. Chairperson <br />Maas believed that would be too long if there was a problem and suggested athree-month <br />interval instead_ <br />C:om missioner Fox noted that daily trips may not be regulated because State law allows a parent <br />to visit the daycare at any time_ <br />Ms. Decker noted that this was a public street and that the neighborhood nay call the Police <br />Department or Code Enforcement Officer whenever something was amiss. She noted that staff <br />has always been attentive to those issues. <br />Ms. Nerland noted that the issues addressed by the Commission should be trati-i c, parking, and <br />noise, and not the number of children_ <br />Commissioner Maas moved to make the required use permit findings and to approve <br />PDUP-7 as recommended by staff, with the following modifications: <br />1. A meeting between the appropriate City representative, the neighbors, and the <br />applicants be held every 45 days of the first year of operation to discuss traffic, <br />parking, and noise issues, and <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 25, 2005 Page 1 9 of 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.