My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 06:060
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2006
>
SR 06:060
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/2/2007 4:06:08 PM
Creation date
2/15/2006 4:39:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
2/21/2006
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 06:060
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
385
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
<br />Neighborhood Meetings <br /> <br />Staff hosted two neighborhood meetings at the Regalia House at Kottinger Village Community <br />Park on September 12,2005 and January 10, 2006. The main concerns from the residents <br />focused on the potential impacts from the proposed development. The two main concerns were <br />the traffic and parking. The neighbors indicated that they have been experiencing in recent <br />years that traffic congestion situation has worsened as new residential developments have taken <br />place. They are concerned that the proposed development would further impact the already <br />congested streets. Additionally, Vineyard Avenue between First and Stanley is concerned with <br />high-density residential complexes and that many of them do not appear to provide adequate on- <br />site parking as the tenants take street parking as their own. The residents are concerned that the <br />proposed two-car garage for each unit may not satisfY residents with more than two vehicles, <br />which has become a more common situation. As a result, these residents would have to park the <br />extra vehicles on the streets, which would further impact the already inadequate on-street <br />parking. <br /> <br />Staff responded to the residents' concerns by guiding them to the findings of the traffic study <br />performed for the Bernal Commercial Project and that proposed development would be required <br />to pay required traffic fees. <br /> <br />VI. PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINDINGS <br /> <br />The Pleasanton Municipal Code sets forth the purposes of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) <br />District and the considerations to be addressed in reviewing a PUD development plan proposal. <br />The Planning Commission must make the following findings that the proposed PUD <br />development plan conforms to the purposes of the PUD District, before making its <br />recommendation. <br /> <br />1. Whether the proposed development is in the best interest of the public health, <br />safety, and general welfare. <br /> <br />As conditioned, the proposed development would meet City standards for street <br />improvements and utility design. Adequate storm drain, sanitary sewer, and water <br />service utilities are present in the area surrounding the development and are sufficient to <br />serve the proposed development. All on-site infrastructure shall be installed by the <br />project developer with connections to municipal systems in order to serve the site. On- <br />site guest parking exceeding what is required by the parking ordinance has been provided <br />and drive aisles and driveways will be designed and constructed to City standards. The <br />project will generate traffic loads that can be accommodated by the existing City streets <br />and intersections in the area. Adequate access would be provided to all structures and <br />units for police, fire, and other emergency response vehicles. The building would be <br /> <br />Case No. PUD-49 Planning Commission <br />Page - II . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.