My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
13
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2016
>
090616
>
13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/30/2016 1:49:21 PM
Creation date
8/31/2016 3:01:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/6/2016
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
13
Document Relationships
13 ATTACHMENT 3
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2016\090616
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
163
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).
View images
View plain text
Amos: The Downtown Specific Plan policy says that we need to initiate an amendment to the <br /> Specific Plan to limit the height, whereas the zoning district allows the maximum height in the <br /> zoning district of Office to be 30 feet. That's measured to the mid-point of the roof, so it could <br /> actually be a couple of feet taller than that. The policies in the Downtown Specific Plan, if staff <br /> were to initiate it and the City were to adopt it, would be to limit any development in the <br /> downtown to have a maximum height of 30 feet and be no more than two stories. So in this <br /> instance, the applicant is not exceeding the 30-foot height limit allowed by the zoning district <br /> for Office, but they are proposing three stories. <br /> Commissioner Brown: Okay, so it's basically only the Specific Plan Land Use Policy 15 that <br /> talks about the two-story restriction, but it's not in the Municipal Code; it's just part of the <br /> Specific Plan so it's guidance that could be over-ridden by a PUD? <br /> Weinstein: Yes, we have this policy that says an amendment to the code should happen but it <br /> hasn't actually happened yet and it's possible that when a policy like this actually gets <br /> converted into Municipal Code policy that the requirement might be a little more nuanced than <br /> this. There might be certain exemptions for certain types of buildings. It's hard to predict how <br /> this would translate to the Municipal Code, but in the meantime, we try to stick to the spirit of <br /> what this policy requests which is that buildings be less than 30 feet in height and not more <br /> than two stories, as well, but there's some flexibility there because there is not a Municipal <br /> Code amendment that has been undertaken at this point. <br /> Commissioner Brown: Okay. As part of the whole civic center proposal, will we be looking at <br /> this area and zoning, because as you said, it's residential primarily today. It was zoned or <br /> rezoned some time ago as Office which is not currently being used as such and essentially the <br /> proposal for this property is suddenly back to mixed use and residential. Is that north side of <br /> the street going to be re-examined as part of the civic center and what is the prevailing theory <br /> as to what that might become, or is that too much out of scope for today? <br /> Weinstein: The Office district is not going to be revisited as part of the civic center master plan <br /> which really focuses on that site and where the civic center is going, but it will definitely be <br /> looked at as part of the Downtown Specific Plan Update which we are going to embark on in <br /> the next couple of months. If you talk to people downtown and you ask them what their top 10 <br /> list of updates to the Downtown Specific Plan should be, revisiting the Office district will be in <br /> the top 5, so we're certainly going to look at that. <br /> Again, sort of looking at the principles that resulted in the Office district being there in the first <br /> place; it was intended to be sort of a buffer district between the Central Commercial Retail <br /> district and residential uses to the west. But principles behind that seem pretty good, but the <br /> actual land use implications of that need to be re-visited. <br /> Commissioner Brown: Okay, thank you. <br /> Chair Ritter: Could you put up the slide that has the picture of the blue office or the zoning. So <br /> basically, just down Main Street is the only office? <br /> Amos: Peters Street. <br /> Chair Ritter: Peters Street I mean is the only Office and then along Old Stanley it looks like <br /> right now. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 25, 2016 Page 3 of 22 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.