My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 10/22/86
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1986
>
PC 10/22/86
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2017 11:03:17 AM
Creation date
4/20/2007 4:26:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/22/1986
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 01/22/86
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
Minutes <br />Planning Commission <br />October 22, 1986 <br />Chairman Lindsey stated that the Planning Commission received <br />exhibits and information on these proposals very late. <br />Commissioner Michelotti stated that it is her understanding that <br />the Commission will be considering a proposal for Site 51 and <br />changes in use for Site 52. <br />Commissioner Wellman asked staff about the traffic impacts and <br />whether or not the Owens Drive extension and Hacienda interchange <br />were considered in the traffic calculations. Mr. Swift indicated <br />the analysis done in connection with the modification of the <br />overall development plans looks at both of these circulation <br />changes. The site specific traffic study relates only to the <br />development of Site 51A which is the auto dealership. Site 51B <br />under the existing street network and data available would still <br />operate at an acceptable level of service. <br />Commissioner Wellman discussed with Mr. Swift traffic peak hours <br />for the Post Office at the Black Avenue facility and that <br />proposed. Commissioner Wellman asked if any Post Office <br />representative had reviewed the proposed site plan. Mr. Swift <br />stated that they have seen this particular application and <br />reviewed the Post Office efforts for site selection throughout <br />the year with no success. Staff feels that a site which could be <br />used by residential development would be preferable. Concern is <br />with traffic making turning movements onto Hopyard Road and Owens <br />Drive, an intersection with is already congested at peak hour. <br />The public hearing was opened. <br />Joe Callahan, Callahan-Sweeney, O'Brien, made a presentation <br />giving background of their efforts toward a Post Office in <br />Pleasanton as far back as 1981. At that time Black Avenue was <br />already having traffic problems at peak hour because of the poor <br />site utilization. The area also has a High School close to it. <br />It is his contention that it doesn't make sense to locate a <br />substation anywhere near the Black Avenue Post Office location as <br />they serve two separate and distinct functions. Further the Post <br />Office has special unique requirements for their site. Mr. <br />Callahan felt that in five-ten years the substation proposed <br />would be totally inadequate. He disagreed with the traffic count <br />speculation of TJKM and staff regarding the increase at Hopyard <br />Road/Owens Drive traffic because of his proposal. He contended <br />that east-west routes would be taken and Hopyard Road probably <br />wouldn't be used to get to the Post Office. Mr. Callahan <br />explained that at the current time AT&T uses a bobtail truck to <br />move mail three times daily. The Associates have their own Zip <br />Code. This doesn't increase trip generation significantly. <br />Chairman Lindsey suggested that the proposed Post Office location <br />would be inconvenient for homeowners. Mr. Callahan indicated <br />that this is so and as it should be; Black Avenue should serve <br />the community. <br />Mr. Callahan took exception to the rigid landscaping requirements <br />and design guidelines adhered to by staff and indicated he <br />- 10 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.