PC 051315 - Laserfiche WebLink

floor might now simply be a usage for people to loiter on versus actual dining, and he wanted to make sure staff has what it needs here. Mr. Weinstein replied that it is a really good question that strikes at the heart of the sort of overlap between regulations and addressing behavior and staff's interactions with the applicants as problems arise. He stated that oftentimes, staff works with applicants on problems that do not have a direct correlation with a Code requirement. He indicated that staff recently worked on addressing lighting levels at the U -Haul on Sunol Boulevard that really had very little to do with Code requirements as they relate to light spillover; however, in response to neighbor complaints, staff was able to work effectively with the applicant at that location to reduce the lighting levels even though staff really did not directly have a lever to do so in the Code. He stated that he thinks this is a situation that is probably unlikely to occur, and one that could really occur in any restaurant with windows that open, although the trigger might be for the second floor. He indicated that staff is really confident that should that sort of issue arise, staff could work with the applicant to address it. He added that a restaurant that has drinks coming over the second -floor balcony would not be a very popular neighbor, and staff would get pressure from the neighbors to address the situation as well. Chair Allen asked staff if they have talked with any other cities that might have designs like this, such as a building in Napa that was recently renovated and has a design similar to this, or if there is anything in Walnut Creek with an open second floor overhang. Mr. Weinstein replied that some among staff have worked in other cities as well and with buildings like this, and it is not something that has come up as a problem. He stated that this is not a particularly common type of building here in Pleasanton and even in places like Walnut Creek and Napa. He added that it is not seen all that much although it does appear, but it is just not something that resonates as a problem. Commissioner O'Connor stated that it is a great - looking building; he loves the design and would not make any changes to it. He indicated that the only thing that caught his eye is Condition No. 7 regarding transom windows. He noted that he has not seen any transom window changes in the plans he has, but he is looking at the neighboring buildings and Downtown and does not see that the neighbors have transom windows. He stated that he loves the way this building looks and would like to leave the windows the way they are. He noted that there are some transom windows up top, but that is a different architectural piece altogether. Commissioner Balch stated that he likes the design a lot as well and that it is well thought -out. He noted that the parking concern raised is consistent with any type of project in the Downtown the Commission has considered, whether on the south side or in the middle where the current one being constructed. He added that it gives him hope that parking will be addressed because the City did acquire the railroad easement and is continuing to keep that in mind and moving forward. He indicated that he is PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 13, 2015 Page 13 of 32