PC 082615 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commission to think of them, who have to run and scurry across their own streets so they do not get hit, and to please keep their street safe. James Frost stated that Measure PP was an interesting exercise due to some people who were involved in it and have one view of what things meant, and several people he knows who were closely involved in it as well and have a different point of view. He indicated that there is clearly some contention here and noted that when he voted for Measure PP, he did not necessarily know those people and voted for having no structures on hills. He stated that he considered a road a structure and that he listened to a Commissioner a couple of weeks ago reading from Wikipedia. He recalled that at the last meeting, he mentioned that he was a very qualified engineer, and as the Commissioner read from Wikipedia, he was very happy because clearly the Commissioner would be defining a road. He noted that at the end of the reading, he was stunned that the Commissioner stated "therefore, a road is not a structure." Mr. Frost stated that the point he is trying to get to is how this problem should be approached. He noted that while Measure PP is clearly confusing because people do not necessarily agree on what its intent was, he was not confused when he voted for it, and he believes he represents a very large number of people in the community. He questioned what would happen if the Council chooses to make an interpretation of Measure PP because that would set a precedent that could compromise and cause a problem for future developments. Mr. Frost stated that with all of this information in mind, he went to see a friend of his who is an outside counsel and actually takes great pleasure in suing municipalities when they contravene the rules of things that are written, and in their discussion, the very first words out of his mouth were, "Well, in California, a road is a structure." He indicated that the problem the Commission is facing right now is if it says a road is not a structure, it will be taken to court one way or another and the Commission will lose; and if the Commission chooses not to develop, Greenbriar will say that it has a zoning that allows it to build on this site. He stated that he does not really know how to advise the Commission on how to go forward, but he does know that Measure PP and the way he and most voters understood it is that a road is a structure, and a structure cannot be built on that hill. Sheila Cotter thanked the Commissioners for their service to the community. She stated that she has been a Pleasanton resident for 15 years and that she will speak to one issue: safety. She pointed out that Junipero Street winds by Mission Hills Park, a park with two playgrounds, a gazebo which could be used for children's parties, and a field scheduled for use by younger sports teams. She noted that as she drove by at 5:00 tonight, there were teams of little girls and boys playing soccer, and with residents and visitors to the Park, there are often cars parked on both sides of the street with people opening car doors and crossing between parked cars, all in a section with many turns that limit visibility. She continued that as Junipero Street passes Mission Hills Park, the street is 40 feet wide, with approximately seven feet on either side being used for parked cars, which leaves 26 feet of road width with no bike lanes. She noted that the Minutes of the previous meeting and the City's report state that there are at least 2,800 car trips per day on Junipero Street. She further noted that Sycamore Creek Way, which would feed into Sunset Creek Lane, is 37 feet wide, has bike lanes striped PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 26, 2015 Page 14 of 43