My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 052511
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
PC 052511
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
7/18/2011 3:23:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/25/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
recommendation by the Planning Commission to the City Council for approval or denial <br />at public hearings. He indicated that they are specific about the mixed-use hotel <br />buildings being the use and not necessarily having a taller office building. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce stated that she liked the flexibility of the language. <br /> <br />Chair Narum agreed and indicated that this is what she is looking for. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank stated that he thinks the market will determine this, and that based <br />on his being in Pleasanton and doing business here for quite a while, and seeing people <br />come in and out of the City, he is not 100 percent convinced that the future is going <br />towards long-term stays or whether or not it will remain the more traditional hotel. He <br />indicated that he is aware of the difficulty people have of getting a room in Pleasanton <br />for just a couple of nights. He reiterated that he believes this is a future marketing <br />decision for whoever the investors will be in this particular property. <br /> <br />Mr. Fleissig stated that once the investment in the infrastructure and parking have been <br />made, it might change the calculus. <br /> <br />3. Is the proposed layout and access plan acceptable? <br /> <br />All the Commissioners agreed that the layout and access plan is acceptable with <br />Option 3. <br /> <br />Chair Narum added that she thinks it blends in well with what is across the street and <br />the Hacienda PUD guidelines. She suggested having the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and <br />Trails Committee review this at some point. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce suggested additional language on page 9 to indicate that besides <br />conforming to the East Bay Regional Parks District Iron Horse Trail Feasibility Study <br />and Master Plan, the Plan conform to the Pleasanton Pedestrian and Bicycle Master <br />Plan as well. She added that she thinks this is great and is excited about it; she is <br />amazed that this is in front of the Commission and is glad that BART is coming to the <br />table and completes the work everyone is trying to do with the Hacienda plan. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank stated that to get this far from when TOD was first discussed is <br />very satisfying. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS RE-OPENED. <br /> <br />Mr. Reynolds stated that in the 19 years he has done TOD for BART, he honestly said <br />that this is the most expeditious and most thorough process he has been through on a <br />station site. He commended staff, the consultants, and the Task Force for being able to <br />going right into discussion of the BART site in a way that is logical and makes sense. <br />He indicated that from his standpoint, BART is much honored to be part of this process. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 25, 2011 Page 19 of 21 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.