My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 040914
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
PC 040914
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:09:53 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:06:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/9/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Ms. Steinle then displayed more conceptual renderings of views from CLC's fourth -story <br />balcony, turned at an angle to show a variety of what might be visible: towards 1 -580, <br />the storage building, and the berm with a ten -foot wall on top. <br />Finally, Ms. Steinle talked about the Commission's recommendation on the signage to <br />address consistency in the illumination styles for the different panels and have only one <br />illumination style for the monument sign. <br />Chair Olson inquired if the storage units belong to CarMax. <br />Ms. Steinle said no and added that they were proposed by CLC. <br />Commissioner Allen stated that she would like to follow -up the earlier discussion <br />regarding the service building and the Commission's recommendation to add trees <br />there. She noted that the vines helped some but do not go as far as the discussion at <br />the Work Session. She inquired what CarMax's thinking was on why it was not taken a <br />little further. <br />Mr. Henderson stated that one of the things they mentioned at the Work Session was <br />that the area was made to be very flexible. He indicated that in most situations, <br />customers are not back there, and any views toward that storage area will be screened <br />by the walls and landscaping on the perimeter of the property. He noted that they had <br />worked with CLC to slide the property over so CLC would have some space to do some <br />appropriate buffer between their properties. <br />Mr. Henderson stated that landscaping in the service building area would hinder their <br />operation and that it is not something that they do in any of their stores. He noted that <br />they had heard about the Commission's concerns about the service building and that <br />they had looked at different options, driving around Pleasanton to see what other people <br />had done. He indicated that installing vines around the building to break up that <br />massing a little bit was approved, and noted that this is not something they have done <br />anywhere else before. He explained that it is an operational issue for them not to have <br />trees back in that area; it makes it more difficult for them, and it is not something they <br />want to do. <br />Commissioner Pearce noted that "operational" and "flexible" were mentioned a few <br />times at the Work Session, and she is trying to understand how trees would hinder the <br />operational situation. She asked Mr. Henderson if a tree would prevent them from <br />hosting another car in that spot and requested him to walk her through this process. <br />Mr. Henderson explained that the area is made to be extremely flexible and that they <br />need to shift the around parking spaces in different parking stalls. He stated that the <br />way the store is laid out is based on sales estimate on what they expect to sell here, <br />and they need to fully utilize all the space that is back there. He noted that trees take <br />up additional space and would make it more difficult for them to operate. He added that <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, April 9, 2014 Page 5 of 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.