My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 051315
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
PC 051315
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:47:25 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:35:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/13/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
floor might now simply be a usage for people to loiter on versus actual dining, and he <br />wanted to make sure staff has what it needs here. <br />Mr. Weinstein replied that it is a really good question that strikes at the heart of the sort <br />of overlap between regulations and addressing behavior and staff's interactions with the <br />applicants as problems arise. He stated that oftentimes, staff works with applicants on <br />problems that do not have a direct correlation with a Code requirement. He indicated <br />that staff recently worked on addressing lighting levels at the U -Haul on Sunol <br />Boulevard that really had very little to do with Code requirements as they relate to light <br />spillover; however, in response to neighbor complaints, staff was able to work effectively <br />with the applicant at that location to reduce the lighting levels even though staff really <br />did not directly have a lever to do so in the Code. He stated that he thinks this is a <br />situation that is probably unlikely to occur, and one that could really occur in any <br />restaurant with windows that open, although the trigger might be for the second floor. <br />He indicated that staff is really confident that should that sort of issue arise, staff could <br />work with the applicant to address it. He added that a restaurant that has drinks coming <br />over the second -floor balcony would not be a very popular neighbor, and staff would get <br />pressure from the neighbors to address the situation as well. <br />Chair Allen asked staff if they have talked with any other cities that might have designs <br />like this, such as a building in Napa that was recently renovated and has a design <br />similar to this, or if there is anything in Walnut Creek with an open second floor <br />overhang. <br />Mr. Weinstein replied that some among staff have worked in other cities as well and <br />with buildings like this, and it is not something that has come up as a problem. He <br />stated that this is not a particularly common type of building here in Pleasanton and <br />even in places like Walnut Creek and Napa. He added that it is not seen all that much <br />although it does appear, but it is just not something that resonates as a problem. <br />Commissioner O'Connor stated that it is a great - looking building; he loves the design <br />and would not make any changes to it. He indicated that the only thing that caught his <br />eye is Condition No. 7 regarding transom windows. He noted that he has not seen any <br />transom window changes in the plans he has, but he is looking at the neighboring <br />buildings and Downtown and does not see that the neighbors have transom windows. <br />He stated that he loves the way this building looks and would like to leave the windows <br />the way they are. He noted that there are some transom windows up top, but that is a <br />different architectural piece altogether. <br />Commissioner Balch stated that he likes the design a lot as well and that it is well <br />thought -out. He noted that the parking concern raised is consistent with any type of <br />project in the Downtown the Commission has considered, whether on the south side or <br />in the middle where the current one being constructed. He added that it gives him hope <br />that parking will be addressed because the City did acquire the railroad easement and <br />is continuing to keep that in mind and moving forward. He indicated that he is <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 13, 2015 Page 13 of 32 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.