My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 082615
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
PC 082615
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:54:00 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:44:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/26/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
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
the residential, so the number of units could be reduced from five to three. He stated <br />that he is looking at the dimension to see if they actually could fit three units, but <br />probably they could get only two across at 30 feet wide. He indicated that it would give <br />less density if it were residential; it would give room for parking, and down the road, if <br />the City supplied parking Downtown somewhere, it could always expand with more <br />commercial <br />D. Does the Planning Commission support the proposed grading and retaining wall <br />plan? <br />Chair Allen stated that was more or less fine with that. She noted that it is an <br />engineering question and would look to the experts to define what is needed. <br />The Commissioners agreed. <br />E. Does the Planning Commission believe the proposal is consistent with the <br />Downtown Specific Land Use policies related to height, design, massing, etc.? <br />Chair Allen stated that the Commissioners discussed that quite a bit. <br />Commissioner Ritter stated that he does not feel that the current zoning has worked for <br />15 years. He indicated that he does not know what is in there right now so he is not <br />opposed to letting the developer trying to come up with some proposals that will pencil <br />out; they have come up with this design and it sounds like it is close. He stated that he <br />definitely thinks it is time to make a change that there be something nice down there <br />versus just a blank lot with some trees and weeds in it. He added that he would like to <br />make sure it ties in with the DTSP. <br />Commissioner Piper agreed. She indicated that she is extremely supportive of this <br />property being developed in general. <br />Commissioner Ritter stated that the building is three stories because the first story is <br />parking under the residential area. <br />Commissioner Nagler stated that it is an attempt to make use of what would otherwise <br />be an attic, so it is not truly a third story. <br />Commissioner Piper stated that it is a third story but they are not making it have that <br />feel. <br />Chair Allen inquired if the third story can be seen by pedestrians on Main Street. <br />Mr. Beaudin replied that he is not certain if a pedestrian on Main Street would be able to <br />see people on those balconies or in the third -story windows. He indicated that there are <br />a number of trees, and the sight distances and the angles will not give a direct view of <br />Main Street at the pedestrian level. <br />Chair Allen noted that people would be able to see the rooflines of the home that is <br />designed right now. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 26, 2015 Page 37 of 43 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.