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
So the PDA kind of went through the project and their recommendation which I highlighted at <br /> the bottom was to allow uses beyond the Office designation on the first floor. We'd like to see <br /> modified C-C zoning which is the same thing you did on the St. Mary project for us which is <br /> kind of like a light duty C-C. We've talked to staff about, is it a full C-C and we can do <br /> everything you could have on Main? Is it a watered-down version that gives you coffee shop, <br /> restaurant, whatever? Maybe it's open until 9:00 p.m. and not midnight. We really think the <br /> site should be zoned C-C which shares the same core overlay and zoning as my neighbor and <br /> parking requirements and all of that. But regardless, we're kind of working on a similar site <br /> zoning to the other project you guys just did. Behind the PDA letter is information from the <br /> office building across the street. I've talked to the owner a couple of times. I've talked to the <br /> commercial brokers who represent him. It's been for sale for 4 '/z years and the upstairs has <br /> been three-quarters vacant for 3-4 years. <br /> He called me when he got the mailing and he said, "Hey! I got your card. I'm excited." He said, <br /> "I'd like to do something with mine, redo it, something," and so we started talking. He said, "I <br /> own tons of office buildings," and so he wrote and faxed it in today his statement, and signed it. <br /> Where I'm going with our process is that it's been zoned 30 years for Office. There's only one <br /> office over there, okay? The guy that has the office is not doing that great. I think he's an island <br /> on his own. The owners that own the piece next door, this 10-unit apartment complex we can <br /> see on the corner and the one lot over are also in my letters. They went to Gerry and Nelson <br /> and everybody and wanted to do a project on their site and they said, well it's currently zoned <br /> O. We have a 10-plex next door. How are they zoned 0? So their vacant lot is currently zoned <br /> O so they're trying to figure out, looking at me, looking at the civic center, so I'm not sure what <br /> you're going to zone the civic center—I'm sorry, our site here and not the new civic center. If <br /> this does move across the field, what is the City going to zone this? I don't believe they're <br /> going to stamp the "0" on it. It will be C-C and a mixed use variety. <br /> There's a 52-page study from the Civic Center Master Plan Task Force that talks all about this. <br /> It talks about usage, ideas, thoughts, and nowhere do they say 0 is this smoking hot deal to go <br /> to. So I just wanted to throw some of that out there because we've really ping-ponged back <br /> and forth with staff on the 0 zoning. I think when we drew it, Tim did a lot of research trying to <br /> get the best fit for the City, and I don't think it's O. I think it's mixed use and everybody's going <br /> to figure that out pretty soon. So I'll let Tim talk on the site and all that. <br /> Tim Ward –Architect: I'd like to talk more about the architecture and planning. In working with <br /> this and actually going to the farm vernacular, what we were trying to do is develop a palette of <br /> a variety of materials. The low pitched roofs, the buildings themselves are much smaller, for <br /> instance all of the residences are half the square footage. We're around 393 square feet on the <br /> upper floor and within the roof. So we've lowered the plane heights down by seven feet so that <br /> the whole appearance is a cluster of sort of a farm with different materials. I know no one <br /> seems to like the galvanized metal siding that we have on some of the residences on the <br /> upper floors but it's really sort of trying to pick up some of the nuances of the old farm style and <br /> the metal roofs that used to be there. <br /> The placement of the buildings was originally much closer to the street and we spread them <br /> further back and re-arranged the parking so that it was clear that there was a very simple way <br /> to get in and out of garages for the residential sites. On the commercial part of the project, the <br /> lower floor, we have about 900 square feet or a little bit more than that, and the three studio <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 25, 2016 Page 7 of 22 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.