CCMIN020706 - Laserfiche WebLink

Linda Gooden, a Pleasanton resident, provided written communication to Council in opposition to the conditional use permit. She mentioned that she and her husband chose to live in this area because it is quite and she would like for this continue. Mayor Hosterman closed the public hearing. Mayor Hosterman asked staff to address traffic calming measures in the neighborhood over the past 10 years. To his knowledge, Mr. Iserson said he did not know if this had been presented to the City. He noted that the City has a Traffic Committee and these issues could be referred to the Committee to work with the neighborhood. Mr. Brozosky asked if the City could implement traffic calming devices on Genovesio Drive since it is a private road? Mr. Roush noted the City has not completely implemented the traffic calming ''tool box" in terms of whether it would be publicly versus privately funded. He believed it would be appropriate to have traffic calming devices privately funded for private streets. The Traffic Committee could review the matter and make recommendations as to what would be appropriate for the neighborhood. Mr. Sullivan asked staff to recap what its efforts were in trying to negotiate and formulate a resolution with the applicant, the neighborhood and the HOA. Following the Planning Commission's action on the application, Mr. Iserson said staff worked with the HOA through the Management Company representative to attempt to try and find a way for staff to facilitate a meeting between the neighborhood and the applicant. Staff's first suggestion was to see if the HOA Board would be willing to represent the neighborhood and the applicant to representative himself with staff involved. Staff was informed that the HOA Board was not interested, and residents of the neighborhood informed staff that they did not want the HOA Board to provide representation. Staff attempted to select neighbors from the community based upon those who had contacted staff expressing particular concern, which was met with resistance from the Management Company representative. At that point, staff advised Mr. Thuse to work with the neighbors on his own to try and reach a compromise. Following that, Mr. Thuse returned to the City with a revised application for a maximum of 11 children. Mr. Sullivan asked staff how it would characterize Mr. Thuse's willingness to compromise with the City on some of these issues? Mr. Iserson said Mr. Thuse offered to work with the homeowners and was agreeable to being a part of any facilitation process. Ms. McGovern inquired about the steps taken to revoke a conditional use permit if the neighbors believed the applicant was not adhering to the conditions of approval. Mr. Iserson said staff would initially attempt to work with the applicant in order to restore the conditions of approval. Staff would visit the site and make observations and document what was occurring and speak with the applicant in an effort to get them to restore and be in compliance with the conditions of approval. If staff were unsuccessful, the next step would be to Pleasanton City Council Minutes 12 02/07/06