PC 071002 - Laserfiche WebLink

- Brian Swift summarized the staff report, providing the history of the original approval. He advised that the building was never constructed, and the building permit lapsed. The application is for the same project, but is being presented as a new project proposal. The proposed floor area is 7,865 sq. ft., slightly larger than the 7,638 originally approved. The additional square footage will be added in the rear of the building. The front elevation was slightly redesigned in order to make a more commercial-friendly window treatment. The overall building architecture and design is essentially the same as the original project. Staff believed it was a high quality building before, and that it has been improved. This lot contains the required number of parking spaces for this building, and no in-lieu parking agreement would be required. Staff recommends approval of this proj ect. Commissioner Kameny noted that the page 4 of the staff report stated that the new building would have sixty-three spaces, as shown on the plans. Eight spaces would be reserved for the Gale Building, leaving a net of fifty-five spaces. The office would need forty-three spaces, and the restaurant would need thirteen spaces, which produced a total of fifty-six spaces. He noted that page 4 of the staff report also read, "Staff sparking analysis supersedes the parking analysis provided on the 'Overall Site Plan' of Exhibit 'A'." He inquired about the shortage of one parking. Mr. Swift replied that he would look at the plan, and advise the Planning Commission of the correct number of parking spaces. ,,- Commissioner Roberts noted that page 5 of the staff report stated, "As permitted by the Pleasanton Municipal Code, however, no parking in-lieu agreement would be required for a sit-down restaurant five years after issuance of the building's occupancy permit. . ." In response to her question, Mr. Swift confirmed that when a new building was constructed for a specific use, such as office or retail, that amount of parking must be provided. When the use in older buildings changed from a less intensive use to a more intensive use, that is allowed without providing new parking. The Code states that when the use in a new building is changed within five years of its construction, additional parking must be provided, or an in-lieu parking fee must be paid. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Mr. Charles Huff, project architect, stated that they worked with staff to make the building more pedestrian-friendly. The building was designed for an office use, but they lowered the windows all the way around to make it more retail-friendly. In response to Commissioner Kameny's question, he stated that they did have adequate parking. The windows were redetailed, and he believed that the proposal before the Commission is superior to the original proposal. Chairperson Maas noted that she did not like the flow and layout ofthe parking lot. Mr. Huff noted that he designed the lot in that manner because the location of the Gale Building and the train station limited the design options. He believed that the parking - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 10, 2002 Page 8