My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 101711 Special Mtg
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
PC 101711 Special Mtg
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
2/2/2012 11:23:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/17/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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 />Mr. Dolan replied that the projects have gone through the routing process and have <br />been shared with the different City Departments process. He added that staff has yet to <br />prepare the staff report and the conditions of approval, so the dialogue is not over and <br />there is much more discussion. He noted that he does not think the Police Department <br />would see this as any special problem area and would probably look at it as a typical <br />30-unit-per-acre apartment complex, similar to the Archstone Apartments where anyone <br />can drive in there anytime. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank commented that he was not a big fan of gates but shared <br />, especially with Site 1 because of the angularity that <br />those streets created. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson stated that he was not in favor of internal roads; that he likes the <br />design and thinks it works better. He indicated that he was concerned about and raised <br />the issue of security because the development is directly across from BART. <br /> <br />noted that there is a variation on the colors in the staff report <br />and the actual exhibits. He inquired if the true color scheme was the exhibits provided <br />by staff or the depictions provided by the applicant. <br /> <br />Mr. Dolan replied that the first big packet the Commission received, which included the <br />staff report and attached materials from the applicant, was the application, and these <br />did not have any variation in colors. He noted that staff had asked the applicant to <br />explore other colors, and some new graphics were submitted; any color differences in <br />those graphics are the result of the exploration of variation. He added that it would be <br />useful for the Commission to share with the applicant and staff any particular colors it <br />does not like or any tones and directions it wants the applicant to explore. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank pointed out that these are printouts from a computer, which are <br />only approximations and premature until the actual color samples are submitted and are <br />seen in the right kind of lighting. <br /> <br />Commissioner . <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> <br />John Wayland, BRE, Applicant, stated that they are excited about presenting these <br />projects and explained that their architect, Irwin Yau of TC Architects (TCA), would <br />spend time reviewing the project elevations. He indicated that before getting into the <br />a publicly-traded <br />company with a business objective to own multi-family real estate on a long-term basis. <br />He noted that BRE has assets that it has owned for more than 40 years, and <br />development is the vehicle it uses for growth in the company. He explained that BRE is <br />different from a merchant builder who typically would sell an asset after a year; it is, <br />instead interested in ensuring that its assets perform and look as good five years down <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 17, 2011 Page 13 of 36 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.