My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 101409
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
PC 101409
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 4:41:23 PM
Creation date
1/28/2010 10:43:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/14/2009
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Olson agreed and recalled that the Commission had previously reviewed <br />a list of possible businesses. He recommended taking-off liquor stores from the list. He <br />indicated that he was really encouraged by the fact that Mr. Trobbe has been talking <br />with the Pleasanton Downtown Association (PDA) and that he suspects those <br />discussions included input as to what PDA would view favorably on the list. <br />Commissioner Pentin and Chair Pearce both concurred with the comments. <br />3. Is the Planning Commission satisfied with the proposed setbacks? <br />Commissioner Pentin stated that this is the first time he had viewed the project but that <br />given the presentation of the architect, he was satisfied with the 45- to 55-foot setbacks <br />on Bernal Avenue. <br />Commissioners Olson and Blank echoed Commissioner Pentin’s comments. <br />Commissioner Narum stated that she supported the setbacks as long as they are <br />consistent with those of the other buildings along Bernal Avenue. She added that she <br />would like to see that consistency on the illustrative plan of what is to come. <br />Commissioner O’Connor supported the setbacks for the retail portion. <br />Chair Pearce agreed with Commissioner Narum’s comments and wanted it to be <br />consistent with the sense of space. <br />4. Does the Planning Commission concur with staff on improving the design interface <br />between the Major #2/Shops #7/shops #7A building and the access driveway? <br />Commissioner Narum requested clarification on what staff was looking for. <br />Mr. Pavan stated that staff’s concern is that although the applicant shows a wall to <br />screen this area, staff believes the area needs to be further enhanced with trellises, <br />landscaping, decorative materials, and something that goes far beyond a flat screen <br />wall. He added that staff is asking for the Commission’s input on this to pursue further <br />detailing and design details to ensure it looks very good. <br />Commissioner Pentin stated that he felt this would be shown at the next stage with <br />landscaping. <br />The Commissioners unanimously voiced preference for not seeing a flat wall. <br />5. Should the sidewalk in front of the Safeway building be increased from 19 feet to <br />24 feet by reducing the driveway aisle from 30 feet to 25 feet in order to provide <br />additional pedestrian/plaza areas? <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 14, 2009 Page 19 of 25 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.