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 /> with both exceptions, indicating that he has no problem <br />with the internal streets being as proposed, but as mentioned by Commissioner Pentin, <br />he would like to see the two main entryways be more accentuated, maybe made a little <br />bit larger, so people know they are the entryways. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank indicated that he has no problem with both exceptions as depicted. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce stated that she is unable to support the live/work depth until she <br />understands it better and inquired why it is proposed to be 30 feet instead of 40 feet. <br />She further inquired if the reason is the lack of windows in the rear of the units. <br /> <br />Mr. Yau replied that a 40-foot depth for a residential unit is extremely deep and creates <br />a portion at the back of the residential unit to be not as livable; hence, as it stands right <br />now, it would not be an ideal residential unit with a 40-foot depth. He added that this <br />would cause the loss of additional parking within the building itself. He noted that as the <br />units get deeper, it takes away some of the advantage of the building, and they have <br />found that people like to park in the building and go up the elevator to their units; the <br />proposed depth is the balance they found between the two. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce indicated that she was fine with the 30-foot depth. She added <br />that having worked on the Hacienda Task Force, the lack of internal streets seems to be <br />the difference between discussing this in theory and seeing it in practical application. <br />She stated that she loves the idea of internal streets, but practically, the proposal works <br />better for this site. <br /> <br />Chair Narum stated that she would also agree and given a preference, she would much <br />rather have the additional open space than the alleys. She also agreed with <br />comments about beefing up the <br />main entry and making it look a little more like a street. <br /> <br />Mr. Yau stated that they had a meeting with Planning staff and the Traffic Engineering <br />Division last week and indicated that for Site 1, the width of the street will be 26 feet and <br />there is a 17-foot setback from the street to the building for the main entryway as well as <br />for the entryway off of Owens Drive. He added that a driveway will come in, with <br />landscaping on both sides, a sidewalk, and again some landscaping before getting to <br />the building. <br /> <br />B. Are the building designs appropriate in their physical context adjacent to large <br />office buildings? <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank stated that he is fine with the way the buildings are designed at <br />this stage. He noted that while he thinks the Pleasanton Look is an important concept <br />and one that the City has spent a lot of time creating, it did not need to be here. He <br />indicated that he was struck when he looked at the plans and noted that this is <br />something different, intended to be a TOD, an environment, a community; not that it <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 17, 2011 Page 19 of 36 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.