PC 01/27/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Iserson clarified that the height of the proposed project is 40 feet to the mid-point of the gable element, as defined by code. Staff scaled it on the full-sized plans. The majority of the building is 37-1/2 feet in height. Robert Ferguson, 4156 Jensen Street, noted he is a long-term resident of Pleasanton and a neighbor of the proposed project. He expressed his support with the application being approved. He stated that this is a beautiful replacement of an eyesore. Craig Scharton, 235 Main Street, Pleasanton Downtown Association, informed the Commission of the formation of the Design Committee for Downtown Pleasanton and provided information on the function of the Committee. He noted that after thorough review of the proposed project, the Design Committee was unanimous in their support of the proposed project. He commented on usage issues and stated there is a need for a hotel in downtown Pleasanton. Further, he noted that parking concerns were not as great in the area of the hotel as in other downtown areas. Robert Cordtz, 262 West Angela Street, commented that the proposed hotel would not have a five-star rating due to the small amount of staff. He provided the Commission with literature relating to requirements for hotels to receive a five-star rating. He further expressed concern with the parking and traffic situation in downtown Pleasanton, the height of the proposed building, and this project not meeting the specifications as contained in the Downtown Specific Plan. Jack Chestnut, 4128 Stanley Boulevard, expressed support with the proposed hotel, the design and character of project complementing the downtown area, the height of building being adequate, and the hotel enhancing retail sales for neighboring businesses. He stated that the number of employees would be limited due to the hotel not providing a restaurant. He felt that the hotel would bring good clientele to Downtown. Bruce Fiedler, 251 Kottinger, commended the applicant on the design of project, the choice of materials, and the quality of the restorations that the applicant has previously performed on buildings in Pleasanton. Further, he stated that the design of the project is complementary to the adjacent buildings, and that there are numerous buildings in downtown Pleasanton with two-plus stories. This project will be a benefit to Downtown. Glen Higgins, 159 Ray Street, expressed his concern with traffic issues. Upon heating that the existing driveway on St. John Street is part of the proposed plan, he stated that he had no issues with the project. Ms. Lacy readdressed the Commission and stated her main concern is not approval of the hotel; however, she expressed concern with the parking lot being housed in the first floor, traffic issues, and the use of metal bars in the parking garage. The applicant readdressed the Commission and stated that the hotel is providing for parking and not utilizing the in-lieu parking alternatives and that staff may be increased to six employees to provide service to its customers. Further, he noted he wotfld be open to suggestions for providing ventilation to the garage versus utilizing metal grates. He noted that a hotel of this caliber would not reach a five-star PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 4 January 27, 1999