Laserfiche WebLink
365 <br /> situation that would be created by development other than on the site. He <br /> stated he concurs with all other conditions of approval. <br /> <br /> Council discussion ensued regarding landscaping as it relates to the Cal- <br /> trans easement. Council was advised that the Koll Company has just received a <br /> letter from Caltrans that states Koll's landscaping plans are approved subject <br /> to meeting all conditions. <br /> <br /> Mayor Brandes expressed concern regarding water pressure in this area. <br /> Mr. Ted Fairfield, Civil Engineer, reviewed the loop system to bring water to <br /> the development, adding that it will not draw on the water pressure. He <br /> stated that Koll Company has already spent more money on improvements than <br /> those included in the North Pleasanton Improvement District, and he felt con- <br /> sideration should be given for this expenditure. <br /> <br /> No one in the audience spoke in opposition to PUD-80-2-2M. <br /> <br /> Mayor Brandes declared the public hearing closed on this application. <br /> <br /> After discussion, the following action was taken: <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mayor Brandes, and seconded by Councilmember Mohr, that <br />the traffic condition 14b-1 be amended to include "If the traffic study analy- <br />sis shows that any affected intersection, or intersections, would exceed LOS D <br />(equal to or grater than 91% of capacity) but can be mitigated so as to be no <br />greater than mid-LOS D (86% of capacity} .... ", and 14b include the following <br />amendments: (iii) In the event that a portion of the traffic causing the traf- <br />fic level to exceed LOS D is, or will be, generated by developments on the <br />City and County of San Francisco Water Department lands, TMI, Alameda County <br />Fairgrounds, or other major developments in the area, the developer shall not <br />be required to pay for more than developer's pro rata share of the cost of a <br />mitigation measure if the City, in conjunction with the developer, is able to <br />impose the additional cost on those other projects contributing to the cumula- <br />tive traffic problem; and (iv) Any traffic study used by the City for purposes <br />of this condition shall exclude traffic counts taken during the Alameda County <br />Fair or during other major events held at the Fairgrounds. <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, and Mayor Brandes <br />NOES: Councilmembers Mercer and Wood <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilmember Butler, and seconded by Councilmember Wood, <br />that Condition 15 relating to parks and recreation facilities, be amended to <br />add the following sentence: "At the time the study is done, consideration <br />shall be given for credit for park and recreation facilities made available to <br />the public within this project" <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mercer, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Brandes <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br /> <br /> It was moved by Councilmember Mercer, and seconded by Mayor Brandes, that <br />in the event the City adopts a school mitigation impact fee, the developer <br />shall be responsible for paying the adopted rate, but not to exceed 25 cents <br /> <br /> 6 - 6-3-86 <br /> <br /> <br />