My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 052516
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2016
>
PC 052516
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2017 2:43:02 PM
Creation date
8/11/2017 2:31:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/25/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
embedded in there and I've been looking at it for 8 years driving to the City Hall here <br />coming to the Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation meetings and so that's <br />got to be telling me something that maybe office is not a high need in that location. Also <br />I think if the City Hall moves across to Bernal that opens up that whole opportunity and <br />at that time we'll know if we do need office spaces and we could zone for that at that <br />time. But I don't think it's fair to push off and have an applicant wait for 5 or 10 years <br />when we finally do that, or even another year for the Downtown Specific Plan to get <br />updated based on market needs. So, I'm okay with deviating a little from it, but I do like <br />having that mixed use building in there. I don't mind just the one. I like that Ace Train is <br />right there and it's workforce housing, we have a shortage of that. And I think there's a <br />market need in Pleasanton for the people who come in and out and I want my kids to <br />come back here and work and be able to afford to live in a little studio. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: Maybe I didn't understand the question on conformance, but <br />thought we were talking about whether the downstairs could be either retail or office. <br />Weinstein: That's right. <br />Commissioner O'Connor: Okay, because I really don't see office coming in here. <br />Chair Ritter: I agree. Those are my thoughts. <br />Commissioner Balch: I think I'm ditto of you. So I don't think the project necessarily <br />needs to be revised. I think how staff has interpreted it is extremely practical in light of a <br />lot of complex issues that it sounds like staff has gone through. So from my point of <br />view, I think this office mixed use on the corner is a good mix. I think it also allows <br />flexibility. Residence 1 converting —I could see that. I'm not sure I'm all the way there <br />yet with it, and with that I'm reserving the parking element challenge that that would <br />bring with it, but the premise of me being able to say "I could see it" is that when it <br />doesn't work, he can flip it back to a residential project and I don't know how we would <br />handle that. So maybe I'm throwing a little hat towards staff's recommendation or <br />alternative. <br />Commissioner Nagler: I appreciate all of the comments that have been made because <br />I'm viewing this project in the context of what I think is likely to occur in the general <br />neighborhood because if we're able to find the funding for a new civic center and library, <br />it's going to be on Bernal and if the civic center /library moved to Bernal, then we're <br />going to have a terrific opportunity in many ways to redefine downtown Pleasanton by <br />virtue of the property we're sitting on. That is an incredibly exciting prospect. If you look <br />at what is a reasonable expectation for the outcome of that planning effort it's going to <br />be a mixed use. There's going to be interesting residences, there's going to be some <br />retail, there may be a small boutique movie theater, presumably there will be a <br />restaurant or two, and it's going to be an extension of what we know has become <br />downtown Pleasanton and I think that's a reasonable expectation. <br />And so as a result, I support allowing the applicant to deviate from the office <br />requirement because it isn't reasonable, therefore, and I'm agreeing, to hold this <br />applicant accountable to decisions made in a completely different context because <br />we're making decisions for the next 30, 40, 50 years not based upon criteria or <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 25, 2016 Page 18 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.