Laserfiche WebLink
suffer an excessive burden <br />employee generated traffic <br />stated that this condition <br />of interim improvements wi <br />Mr. Swift pointed out that <br />this same condition. <br />for improvements as a result of <br />such as that of AT&T. Mr. Swift <br />covers the cost of their 'fair share' <br />thout which LOS "E" would take place. <br />AT&T, Rouse and others were subject to <br />Condition No. 5: This is the first time he has ever been <br />subjected to a school impact fee on commercial projects. He felt <br />this project is serving rather than creating additional <br />population for schools. <br />Condition No. 7: Reference to density of landscaping along <br />5toneridge Drive. He asked that David Gates have the opportunity <br />to work with the staff. Mr. Swift indicated this is acceptable <br />to the staff. Chairman Lindsey said staff and the applicant can <br />work together regarding this. <br />Condition No. 8: Mr. Smith questioned the requirement of <br />Building #4 coming back before the Planning Commission and City <br />Council prior to issuance of any building permits. Mr. Swift <br />said this is a current requirement of all development in north <br />Pleasanton at this point. <br />STANDARD CONDITIONS: <br />Condition No. 1: He felt it would be physically impossible to <br />have the street numbers visible from the street. Mr. Swift said <br />visibility from the parking lot would be okay. <br />Condition No. 7: They will submit an application for a <br />comprehensive signing program. He asked which governmental body <br />would consider this. Mr. Swift stated such an application <br />requires approval of the Design Review Board. <br />Condition No. 9: He asked that this condition be eliminated. <br />Wheel stops create an absolute maintenance problem. Staff had no <br />problem with the elimination of the condition. Chairman Lindsey <br />indicated his support of this deletion, and stated this would be <br />a Change to Condition No. 17. <br />Condition No. 16: Mr. Smith felt this condition was too broad. <br />Mr. Swift stated that if the transformers are below ground, there <br />would be no problem. <br />Conditions No. 20 & 21: They have already reviewed the plans <br />with the Police Department. He asked that these conditions be <br />removed. Mr. Swift stated that perhaps the conditions should <br />remain as they will not hurt anything and will still give the <br />City discretionary approval. He stated he is sure Police will <br />furnish a letter as to the compliance of the developer if they <br />have already complied. <br />Condition No. 30 & 39: The applicant asked about the requirement <br />of a cash bond and erosion control conditions. Mr. Okamura said <br />these conditions apply to all developments. <br />- 9 - <br />,.._ _ _ ~_., _ _ _ r <br />