My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 03/14/84
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1984
>
PC 03/14/84
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2017 10:41:05 AM
Creation date
4/24/2007 5:02:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/14/1984
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 03/14/84
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 />Page 6 <br />Mr. Pang indicated that traffic is not an exact science, but that their figures <br />are within two percent which is a close difference. <br />Howard Garrigan stated that the traffic report refers to LOS C, D, E and that <br />the Industrial General Plan Review Committe has stated that no roadway should <br />exceed 90% capacity and he failed to understand why residential areas do not <br />have the same requirement. He urged that the City establish a policy concerning <br />this. He stated that at the intersection of Vineyard and First Street between <br />7:35am and 8:OOam one must wait through two signal changes and frequently three. <br />Donna Graves, said she has been before this body before complaining about <br />traffic on Vineyard Avenue & i•s opposed to development, but felt this development <br />would have. an insignificant effect on the traffic situation of the area. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />Commissioner Lindsey felt that a long term solution is for the extension of <br />Bernal Avenue/Stanley Blvd. to Valley Avenue. He asked when this would be <br />accomplished. Mr. Warnick stated felt it would be at least one and one-half <br />years before this is completed. There has not been too much cooperation between <br />the PUC Staff and the Railroad Company. The City wants an at-grade crossings. <br />Commissioner Doherty asked how many people have discovered that the Pico bridge <br />is open. Mr. Warnick indicated there is no count but the City will be taking <br />one soon. <br />CommissionerWilson said for years the Planning Commission took the position <br />that there would be no development in the area until the extension of Pico <br />Avenue was completed. He feels the problem is an extremely serious one and <br />believes that no project should be built nor building permits issued until <br />such time as Stanley Boulevard is connected to Valley Avenue. <br />Commissioner Doherty concurred with CommissionerWilson. He feels no construction <br />should commence until such time as Bernal Avenue is connected <br />to Valley Avenue including the grade crossing. The people living in the area <br />have a traffic problem as evidenced by testimony. <br />Commissioner Wilson asked about the growth management allocation and what <br />the possibility of this project was for development in the near future. Mr. <br />Harris stated that the allocation is not made until much later in the year. <br />Commissioner Lindsey asked how the developer felt about waiting for development <br />until Pico Avenue was broughr_through Stanley Boulevard to Valley Avenue. <br />Mr. Baldacci said that no one seems to know when the connection will be made. <br />Chairman Jamieson appreciated the comments of Mr. Garrigan concerning having <br />a City policy for LOS in residential neighborhoods. It is something that <br />should be kept in mind. <br />-6- <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.