My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
04 ATTACHMENT 4
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
012908
>
04 ATTACHMENT 4
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/23/2008 4:56:46 PM
Creation date
1/23/2008 4:52:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
1/29/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
04 ATTACHMENT 4
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Blank inquired why bicycle lanes were not mentioned. Ms. Stern replied that the <br />language was "such as ride-sharing" and was not intended to be exclusive. Commissioner Blank <br />believed that bicycle lanes should be supported more strongly. Chairperson Fox suggested <br />including the language called out in the Livermore General Plan. Ms. Stern noted that would be <br />fine. <br />• Include language called out in the Livermore General Plan. <br />Commissioner Narum noted that not every item in Livermore's language would be applicable to <br />developers, and that they would not provide public transportation. Commissioner Blank noted <br />that the developers could subsidize public transportation. <br />Page 3-S <br />No changes. <br />Page 3-6 <br />Chairperson Fox noted that Livermore's General Plan read, "Develop a Downtown circulation <br />system that is pedestrian-oriented and supports Downtown as a destination." She believed that <br />may be the intent of Pleasanton's goals with respect to traditional pedestrian-friendly <br />atmosphere. Ms. Stern noted that this section specifically addressed the design quality of the <br />Downtown, which included "wide sidewalks, shade trees, and outdoor dining," which was in <br />contrast to the idea of widening the streets to achieve the LOS. This paragraph was intended to <br />convey the idea that Pleasanton had specific design characteristics in the Downtown that the City <br />wanted to preserve, possibly at the expense of getting traffic through. She did not know whether <br />that met Chairperson Fox's intent of Downtown being a destination. <br />Page 3-7 <br />Commissioner Narum noted that she was not able to find the location of the first paragraph under <br />"Parking" marked "Moved to next page." Ms. Stern noted that the language followed on the <br />same page and that it was left over from a pagination change. <br />Commissioner Narum believed that the language "developing or continuing to find parking for <br />Downtown" reflected a stated intent of the City. Ms. Stern noted that the Plan discussed the <br />recently acquired Corridor but it did not discuss very thoroughly what the Specific Plan said <br />about Downtown and shared parking. She noted that it could be included in the document. <br />Commissioner Narum noted that while the City collected in-lieu parking fees, she believed that <br />additional parking would be needed for Downtown. <br />• Include the language "developing or continuing to find parking for Downtown." <br />Commissioner Narum noted that the phrase "for mixed-use projects" was referenced in the last <br />sentence of the first paragraph under Off-Street Parkin. She inquired whether transit-oriented <br />development (TOD) should be referenced as well. Ms. Stern believed that applied in this case. <br />• Reference the term "transit-oriented development (TOD)." <br />EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 24, 2007 Page 6 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.