PC 04/14/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

parking/traffic, architecture and design, landscaping, signage, and conformance with other Hacienda Design Guidelines. Mr. Iserson noted that there are modifications to Condition No. 9, relating to Public Art, Condition No. 47 relating to installation of fire sprinklers, and Condition No. 34, giving the Planning Director the discretion to modify construction hours, as referenced in staffs memorandum dated April 9, 1999. In conclusion, he stated that staffs recommendation is that the Commission approve Case PUD-81-30-79D subject to the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit "B," including modification to Conditions 9, 34, and 47. Discussion ensued relating to whether the Commission has final approval over the design review process for this project, the square footage and height for buildings; and, the possibility ora left-turn restriction being placed on vehicles exiting parking lots. PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Mark Sweeney, 4309 Hacienda, representing the applicant, provided an overview of project and stated that the project has been well received by the citizens of Pleasanton. He further noted that proposed tenants have been informed that the Commission will review the design of buildings on Site 5B. He commented on the traffic mitigation programs that the applicant has created. In conclusion, he requested that the Commission approve the project. Discussion ensued relating to the visual impacts and massing of project. The architect and landscaper provided an overview of landscaping, design of project, materials being used on buildings, massing of buildings, visual impacts of buildings, and public art. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Commissioner Kameny noted that the project is aesthetically pleasing and that project will be a signature building for the area. Commissioner Sullivan commented on the traffic impacts and commended the developer on the traffic mitigation programs being put in place. He further reiterated that due to previous developement agreements being reached between the City Council and the applicant, this project must be approved regardless of current factors; however, he noted the importance of future development agreements given careful consideration before their approval. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Cooper relating to land use, Commissioner Sullivan noted he envisioned a mixed land use designation for this area to reduce vehicle usage and increase pedestrian usage. He noted his concern with moving ahead as usual with major traffic problems looming. He commented on the nicely-done landscaping on this project. Commissioner Cooper stated that the land use around the BART station is appropriately designated and that the landscaping and overall layout of area will be exceptional. He commended the developer on the design of project, the buildings not being in close proximity to each other, and the area not feeling oppressive. He noted he would vote in support of approving application. PLANNING COMMISSION MiNUTES Page 9 April 14, 1999