My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 081215
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
PC 081215
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:52:26 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:43:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/12/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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
church its related uses and retain the existing preschool /private school facility as <br />a stand -alone use with a modified operation and site plan, subject to the <br />Conditions of Approval in Exhibit A -2. <br />Commissioner Ritter seconded the motion. <br />Commissioner O'Connor added the two issues for clarification to come to an <br />agreement, including the parking agreement that staff has already started work on. <br />Chair Allen stated that the second is the enhanced amenity, and there is a third one on <br />density and the reduced number of units. <br />Chair O'Connor stated the Commission is looking for an amenity that ties these two <br />neighborhoods together better, which may require the removal of up to two units. <br />Chair Allen clarified that they could be related but are not necessarily so. <br />Chair O'Connor inquired if the Commission would say it wanted the density reduced if it <br />is not necessary for the amenities or just reduce the number of units. <br />Chair Allen stated that the project is too dense. He asked Mr. Beaudin to recap the <br />three items again in language that works for everyone. <br />Mr. Beaudin stated that there is the amenity, and he wanted to make sure he is really <br />clear here because what he heard was to tie the two sites together and an additional <br />amenity. He indicated that based on the site plan and the way it is configured today, he <br />is not sure the applicants will be able to tie these two together, but staff will make every <br />effort in working with the developer to find a way to do that, but it may just have to be an <br />additional amenity. <br />Commissioner O'Connor clarified that the amenity is to be interior to the project <br />Mr. Beaudin continued that along those lines staff would be looking at the potential of <br />removing one to two units to accommodate that improved amenity; the unit reduction <br />could also just help the overall site plan and development in general, should that be <br />appropriate. He indicated that the final issue is the parking agreement that would help <br />address the parking needs related to some surrounding uses, including the senior <br />housing project and additional parking for the residential development. <br />Chair Allen and Commissioner Ritter accepted the amendments to the motion <br />regarding the enhanced amenity, the unit reduction, and the parking agreement, <br />as previously discussed by the Commission. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 12, 2015 Page 30 of 34 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.