2564 - Laserfiche WebLink

Minutes Planning Commission 11/14/84 Park and Recreation feels that this corridor is necessary. The park falls short of four acres as requested with the developments they have tried to site. Regarding Condition No. 11 they asked that 20' be allowed instead of 25' or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. He felt that Condition No. 3 would kill the project if imposed because of the delicate balance economically. The annexation process would have to be cancelled and the area would then not be in the City. He addressed Pang's traffic report as sited by staff. He felt that mitigations of this project including diversion of traffic to Stanley Boulevard, the project would improve Bernal Avenue from Tawny to Vineyard Avenue and eliminate the 'country' configuration of the roadway. People would use Bernal Avenue from Palomino over the hill to Kottinger Drive allowing traffic to be diverted; access from this project only comes out on Vineyard Avenue. the driving distance to Stanley Boulevard intersection vs First Street is a superior route. He stated that the Pang Traffic Report did not consider the creation of a park in this area. This may reduce traffic because people would use this park instead of others. The Mike Valley project and Kottinger project traffic reductions are not assumed in the Pang Report. He reviewed other projects in the area. Commissioner Innes then discussed with Mr. Dunkley findings of the Pang Report. _ Commissioner Wellman asked where parking would be located within the park. Mr. Dunkley responded that this is a neighborhood park and designed for neighborhood uses and not intended to require a substantial amount of parking. There is parking on Vineyard Avenue if access is on Vineyard. Park and Recreation is recommending that parking be allowed on Tawny. Howard Richner, 3469 Bernal Avenue, lives next door to the project. He asked which side of Bernal Avenue would be widened. Mr. Warnick explained that most of the widening would be on the east side. Mr. Richner indicated confusion and thought that it would be widened on both sides. Mr. Warnick indicated that there will be only slight widening on the other side. Mr. Richner asked if his house would have to be moved back. Mr. Warnick indicated that it would not be moved. Mr. Warnick explained that the widening would be for two lanes in each direction, with a median, and on parking on either side. Nancy Storch, 3193 Chardonnay, urged approval of the park. She has been working for a park for four years and has worked with the homeowners association and Art Dunkley concerning this. There is currently no park less than 1-1/2 miles away from the area. The park will meet the needs of a large community. She recognized that only some of the needs of the area would be met with regard to facilities on the park site but if this site isn't used now for a park the cost would probably prohibit a park in the future on other property. Commissioner Lindsey asked Mr. Storch if she had concerns about traffic on Vineyard Avenue resulting from this development. Ms. - 8 -