PC 05/14/86 - Laserfiche WebLink

Minutes Planning Commission May 14, 1986 treated as a modification, not as a new application. Commissioner Innes argued that each time Reynolds and Brown and Hacienda Business Park come back with changes, the City modifies the conditions as needed if it is felt the environment is affected. He felt that 5,000 employees coming to Bernal and Valley would have an impact. Perhaps a traffic light should be required on Valley Avenue. Mr. Swift explained that this development installed waterline improvements in lieu of participating in the proposed water assessment district. Further they have completed the public streets for traffic impacts. Chairman Lindsey asked about the park issue. He asked staff if a new condition should be added. Mr. Swift said the Commission can add this condition if they are so inclined. Mr. Pogue said he would like to know the fiscal impact to their group should this condition be recommended for inclusion in project approval. They are already building a one acre park in the center of their facility. Commissioner Innes alluded to the fact that every other development requires the inclusion of a traffic report with their submittals. Chairman Lindsey didn't feel traffic was problem with this modification and if it is required at this stage the design review application could not be considered. Commissioner Innes said he would be willing to waive the requirement for Case PUD-80-2-1D, but would like to see a traffic report for each proposal for this park in the future. He felt 5,000 employees would have an impact. Mr. Swift stated that staff did not ask for a new traffic study because the square footage of the park has not been increased. Mr. Progue also said they built the bridge across the arroyo, widened Bernal Avenue and installed the Valley Avenue connection to Bernal Avenue to mitigate traffic concerns and their request is a modification to the original proposal. Chris Kinzel, TJKM discussed the traffic impacts of this project. Their firm prepared traffic studies for the original EIR on this Business Park. The LOS at Bernal and Valley is "B" which includes a volume to capacity ratio of 0.68. With the build out including that of the SFWD lands, the volume to capacity ratio would still be 0.78, which is LOS "C". The build out includes two new I-680 connections. Traffic at Bernal Avenue and Valley are generally residents of Pleasanton trying to get to the freeway. When the new connections are completed there will be other alternatives to I-G80. The projections for the buildout show Valley and Bernal Volumes are within reasonable ranges and the street width appears to be very adequate. Bernal may need to be widened west of I-G80 based upon residential development of that area. Stan Kephart, 6232 Corte Altamira, indicated he was a voting member on City Council when the project was originally approved, he also has property backing up to the park and as well is an employee of Callahan Pentz Properties. He supports the project but does have some concerns He asked if the conditions imposed in the 1981 approval would still stay in place. Mr. Swift - 11 - _,._ _ . _...... _ _ _ T