My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 120915
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
PC 120915
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:59:12 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:55:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
12/9/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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
Mr. Beaudin replied that staff would ask the Commission to be very specific with the <br />kinds of changes it is looking for. He noted that the applicant is present, with the <br />designer, and they could weigh in on that direction and give early feedback; however, if <br />it is a matter of a denial or directing continuance with an applicant who disagrees with <br />those changes, moving it forward to the Council may be ultimately what happens <br />because the Commission wants more, and the applicant does not want to make the <br />changes. <br />Commissioner Ritter stated that he is not in favor of continuing the project. He indicated <br />that he heard three of the Commissioners say they like the project and two for sure do <br />not like the project the way it is. <br />Commissioner O'Connor stated that there some points here that the Commissioners <br />can agree they want done: one is to provide all or close to all 23 parking spots onsite. <br />He noted, however, that if the applicant does not want to work with staff to bring that <br />about, then that pretty much ties the Commission's hands. <br />Commissioner Balch stated that he does not agree that the applicant has to put all the <br />parking onsite. He indicated that the Commission already did the math, and the idea is <br />to get 10 spaces onsite and pay the in -lieu fee for the other ten. <br />Commissioners Piper and Ritter agreed. <br />Chair Allen disagreed and stated that seven is her number for in -lieu parking fee <br />because she is open to waiving the three for the demolition. <br />Commissioner O'Connor noted that the Commission has not agreed to that waiver <br />Commissioner Balch stated that however it is justified, what Commissioner O'Connor is <br />saying is that five more spaces should be provided onsite; and from there, the in -lieu <br />parking fee would be for five spaces as well. He added that that is where the majority of <br />the Commission is. <br />Commissioner Piper clarified that Commissioner Balch is saying he is not in support of <br />requiring the applicant to do all 10 additional spaces onsite. <br />Commissioner O'Connor stated that Commissioner Balch is willing to say ask for five <br />more parking spaces onsite and have the other five for in lieu fee. <br />Commissioner Piper clarified that she agrees on that fact that the Commission should <br />not demand all of the parking spaces to be on the property, but she is not sure she <br />agrees on the numbers. She added that she was torn because she is also in favor of <br />the project the way it is, even though, sadly, she has a strong feeling about the parking. <br />She noted, however, that parking is an issue in the Downtown and she does not like the <br />idea that this piece of property is sitting ugly and vacant while here is someone who is <br />willing to put a really cool project there. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, December 9, 2015 Page 33 of 40 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.