My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 112906
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
PC 112906
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:28:19 PM
Creation date
7/12/2007 10:10:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
11/29/2006
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 112906
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
computation of one pazking space per six seats. She noted that staff requested that the <br />Church look at the actual usage and to accommodate and maximize the opportunities for <br />pazking which then included on-street pazking on Stoneridge Drive. <br />Commissioner Blank commented that eliminating the 28 spaces on Stoneridge Drive <br />would inadvertently force more traffic into the neighborhood for people looking for <br />pazking places. Commissioner O'Connor noted that those driving would see the white <br />stripe of the bike lane. Commissioner Peazce agreed that this would be hue during the <br />day. Acting Chairperson Fox asked Commissioner Blank whether he would accept the <br />proposed amendment to eliminate parking on Stoneridge Drive. Commissioner Blank <br />noted that he was concerned that the bike lane striping would not be as visible and asked <br />staff if a reflective paint or other material could be used. Ms. Decker responded that the <br />lane could be painted with thermoplastic reflective paint. <br />Commissioner Blank suggested an alternate amendment to add red reflectors on the <br />outermost (northernmost) bicycle lane striping along the Church's Stoneridge Drive <br />frontage. <br />Ms. Decker proposed that rather than specify colors, the amendment simply state <br />reflectors. <br />Commissioner Peazce reiterated that she was in support of the project but was extremely <br />concemed about adults and small children getting out of their cazs. <br />Commissioner Pearce accepted the proposed amendment. <br />Ms. Decker indicated that in conferring with the City Engineer, because it is a bike lane, <br />it should not have anything like raised buttons and that the amendment should read <br />"thermoplastic reflective paint." Ms. Decker suggested re-opening the public hearing <br />prior to a vote to understand whether the applicants were amenable to those conditions. <br />Commissioner Blank indicated that if the applicants were not amenable, they could <br />appeal the decision to the City Council. <br />The applicants indicated that they were amenable to the additional conditions. <br />Acting Chairperson Fox indicated that there was a motion and a second and asked <br />Commissioners Olson and O'Connor if they had any other comments or wished to <br />discuss the item further. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE: <br />AYES: Commissioners Blank, O'Connor, Olson, and Pearce. <br />NOES: Commissioner Fox. <br />ABSTAIN: None. <br />RECUSED None. <br />ABSENT: None. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 29, 2006 Page 22 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.