My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 081011
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
PC 081011
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
10/3/2011 3:47:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/10/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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 />With regard to raising the height of the sign, Commissioner Pearce stated that she <br />originally did not care, but when she read the Minutes, she saw that there was a lot of <br />discussion about signage and that the majority of the prior Planning Commission was in <br />favor of a lowered sign or subdued sign, different than the gas station monument sign. <br />She stated that, therefore, she would like to leave the sign as is, given that there is no <br />additional information requested apart from the ExtraMile. She indicated that she likes <br />the suggestion of putting Bernal Corners back up, questioning why the three gooseneck <br />lamps would be left up if there was nothing to illuminate. <br /> <br />The other Commissioners also agreed with having the Bernal Corners sign back up. <br /> <br />Chair Narum agreed with the Commissioners comments. She stated that her <br />recollection of this is that the people who wanted to build this kept coming back to the <br />Planning Commission, and when the Commission kept opposing the proposal, the <br />applicant asked the Commission what it wanted, which was to have something that <br />looks residential. She indicated that the applicants went to the Dahlin Group in <br />Pleasanton to design this, and they determined how to put the guts of the pump in it. <br /> <br />Chair Narum stated that she does not think it is the C <br />pick colors. She added that she understands the need for the corporate colors, <br />and wondered if, as a way to solve this problem, the applicant would be amenable to <br />going back to the original architects, having them work with the colors, and then coming <br />back with something that the architects feel meets what they were trying to achieve <br />when they built the building. She indicated that she did not hear the applicant wanting <br />to necessarily diffuse the colors and suggested a third party be considered. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank stated that there are two things the Commission could do: (1) The <br />Commission could continue the item to give the applicant the opportunity to turn this into <br />something staff would consider as minor changes to the paint color, and the <br />Commission will not need to see the item again; however, this may result in losing the <br />Bernal Corners sign as the applicant is not agreeable to keeping it. (2) The <br />Commission could approve the application as is and add that the Bernal Corners sign <br />remain on the building. He noted that either one of this might accomplish the same <br />thing. <br /> <br />Mr. Dolan inquired if the second suggestion included <br />approval. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank said yes, with the Bernal Corners sign being added back. <br /> <br />Mr. Dolan stated that either option would work and that even if the Commission opted <br />for the second option, the first one is still available because if the proposal got to a point <br />where staff did not think the change was substantial, the application would be withdrawn <br />and would be approved on the staff level. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 10, 2011 Page 11 of 15 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.