CCMIN021688 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Staska urged Council to respond to Planning Commission recommendations that no action be taken until completion of a revised traffic study based on 1987 counts. Mr. Harvey Levine, Attorney representing the applicant, stated the General Plan Committee adequately addressed traffic concerns in the new General Plan; this project fits within those regulations therefore traffic should not be a concern. He stated the proposed project has had four delays already; another delay would be unreasonable and unfair. He felt it is also unfair to threaten a moratorium because of traffic concerns. He stated this project has under- gone many changes, and that it is now supported by most of Pleasanton Meadows residents. He urged approval of this project. Councilmember Butler stated that the traffic concerns are important but Council has established framework and guidelines in North Pleasanton to deter- mine whether or not a project goes over the threshold. The system has served well. This project appears to have followed the guidelines and has fully ad- dressed the traffic concerns. He stated that when the restaurant plans are presented the traffic problem will be closely considered to see its affect on this intersection. Councilmember Wilson stated it is particularly sad that perhaps everything is not understood by the general public; all North Pleasanton improvements have been financed by the developers through an assessment district - state and federal funds are not involved in these improvements. He stated that the property owner at Santa Rita Road and Pimlico has paid approximately $300,000 for these street improvements; to place a moratorium would be unfair - it can- not happen. He will support this project, and is not opposed to larger projects. Councilmember Mohr stated her concerns regarding hours of operation, sale of alcohol, and aesthetics have been dealt with. She stated that with regard to traffic, it meets the requirements of the code and she is comfortable with the project. Councilmember Brandes stated the traffic concerns expressed are legitimate and are also concerns of the Council, but mechaanisms have been put in place to mitigate traffic problems. He stated the state and federal governments have been remiss in road improvements; and that the property owners are paying for the improvements through an assessment district. Mayor Mercer stated he agrees a service station is needed in North Pleasanton but he feels this location could have a better use; a location in Hacienda Business Park would be better for a service station. He felt the Planning Commission recommendation is a good decision; Council needs to see the ultimate configuration of the Santa Rita interchange and its impact before approving a service station at this location - he feels it is a mistake to approve this application. It was moved by Councilmember Brandes, and seconded by Councilmember But- ler, that Ordinance No. 1349, approval of PUD-80-15-SD, application of Tioga Construction Company to fezone an approximately 3.63 acre site to PUD {Planned Unit Development)-Commercial District and to approve a development plan for an approximately 30,142 sq. ft. mixed use commercial complex located at the southeast corner of Santa Rita Road and Pimlico Drive, subject to all condi- tions contained in Attachment A of Staff Report 88:76, be adopted. - 9 2-16-88