My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 052301
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
PC 052301
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:37:28 PM
Creation date
4/15/2003 6:40:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/23/2001
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 052301
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
<br />-- <br /> <br />,- <br /> <br />/"'- <br /> <br />representatives of Shadow Cliff's and surrounding neighbors methods to assist in <br />trash clean-up (including the formation of a clean-up committee); <br />. a comparison of the proposed building and the Antioch McDonald's shall be <br />prepared, with the results brought back to the Planning Commission <br />Commissioner Arkin seconded the motion. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE <br /> <br />AYES: <br />NOES: <br />ABSENT: <br />ABSTAIN: <br /> <br />Commissioners Arkin, Kameny, Maas, and Roberts <br />Commissioner Sullivan <br />None <br />None <br /> <br />Resolution No. PC-2001-25 and PC-2001-26 were entered and adopted as motioned. <br /> <br />Commissioner Maas stated that her only reservation pertains to the design review. She noted <br />that since there are no residents present to object to the project, she feels that the use is <br />appropriate for the business park. <br /> <br />b. PDR-126, Patrick and Debra Pickerell <br />Application for design review approval to construct a 20,982-square- foot, one- and two- <br />story building located at 3283 Bernal A venue. Zoning for the property is PUD-C <br />(Planned Unit Development - Commercial) District. <br /> <br />Mr. Pavan presented the staff report, noting that at the its last meeting, the Planning Commission <br />expressed concerns regarding the proposed building architecture and building colors. He noted <br />that at that time the Planning Commission directed staff and the applicant to work together to <br />come up with alternative colors and two building design alternatives. He presented the three <br />alternative color schemes that have been submitted by the applicant, along with the original <br />proposed colors. He commented that the color renderings do not quite match the color boards. <br />Mr. Pavan advised that staff does not feel that the revised architectural design and alternative <br />color schemes meet the direction of the Planning Commission, and, therefore, are recommending <br />denial or continuance. He noted that if the Planning Commission feels a continuation ofthis <br />item is warranted that at least a one-month continuance be granted to work out the details. He <br />also noted that conditions of approval are included in the staff report, should the Planning <br />Commission wish to approve the application. Mr. Pavan noted that Mr. Cannon, the peer- <br />reviewing architect, is present this evening. <br /> <br />Commissioner Maas stated that while she is a business owner in this area, she does not have a <br />conflict of interest with this application. She further stated that she met with the applicant, as she <br />had volunteered to do at the last meeting. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry from Commissioner Kameny, Mr. Pavan advised that staff is unable to <br />recommend any of the proposed alternative color schemes, noting that staff did not look at the <br />color schemes in the context of which color scheme had been toned down. Commissioner Maas <br />stated that she believes that color scheme "C" has been toned down from the original submittal. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES <br /> <br />May 23, 2001 <br /> <br />Page 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.