CCMIN020706 - Laserfiche WebLink

Jerry Iserson, Director of Planning and Community Development, presented the staff report. There was a break at 8:13 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:25 p.m. Mr. Brozosky asked how the Vehicle Code was enforced given City limitations to enforce traffic laws on a private street? Mr. Neal said it would be voluntary compliance. He noted that a homeowners' association (HOA) can take civil or administrative action against a homeowner and it has the ability to levy a fine and/or revoke a parking privilege. It moves out of the criminal and police arena and into the civil arena and the relationship between the resident and the HOA. In theory, a security guard could clock a resident on radar and because a record of the residents' license plates is available, a civil fine could be levied against the homeowner. He noted that a security guard is unable to enforce the Vehicle Code. There are sections in the Vehicle Code that apply to both public and private property, sections such as driving under the influence of alcohol, reckless driving and handicap parking violations. The City is prohibited from enforcing any provisions of the Vehicle Code related to speeding, stop signs and turning restrictions on a private street. Two sections in the Vehicle Code would permit the Council by resolution to make the Vehicle Code applicable to that property: one section would require the homeowners/residents to vote in the majority to support it and the other section gives Council the ability to impose the Vehicle Code on the property under certain conditions. Mr. Brozosky asked how a condition requiring all patrons to use the driveway of the daycare for loading and unloading the children and staggered drop off times would be enforced? Mr. Iserson said this would be a condition of approval that the applicant would be required to comply with and similar to other conditions of approval, staff relies on the applicant's agreement to the conditions to help ensure they are fulfilled. Staff would become aware of any issues on a complaint basis if neighbors believed the conditions were not being fulfilled. Mr. Brozosky inquired about age restrictions on this application. He did not believe Council could regulate the age requirements. Michael Roush, City Attorney, said that was correct. The conditional use permit regulates the number of children as opposed to the age of the children; however, there are certain requirements if the applicant reaches a certain number of children that some of the children must belong to the actual applicants Ms. McGovern inquired about the basis for the Planning Commission's denial of the conditional use permit. Mr. Iserson said the Planning Commission's denial of the use permit was based upon traffic issues on what the Commission believed was lack of enforceability on a private street. The Planning Commission noted the small lot character of the single family development and believed there would be more traffic generated on this site as opposed to a small family or normal residential use as well as issues pertaining to safety in terms of the street configuration. Pleasanton City Council Minutes 7 02107/06