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
and we want to make sure that anything that happens is going to be as attractive and as <br />exciting as what the applicant has shown us tonight. <br />Commissioner Brown: Okay, fair, thank you. <br />Weinstein: If I could just add to that really quickly too, I think it also makes sense to <br />tackle the district as part of the Downtown Specific Plan because the downtown is really <br />a complete organism. Its districts sort of work in conjunction with each other and it's <br />possible as well that there might be tweaks to the Central- Commercial district as well <br />and that could also affect how we treat the Office district, so it seems to make sense to <br />do everything together just to make sure that the land uses are compatible and sort of <br />work off each other. <br />Commissioner Brown: My preference was that it be addressed as part of the Downtown <br />Specific Plan. In fairness to the applicant, I wanted to ask the question in terms of are <br />the timelines coincidental, which you explained they are. So if the recommendation was <br />to wait until the Downtown Specific Plan, then that's the time I'm looking at versus <br />approving this as a one -off, knowing that it may trigger additional properties that would <br />potentially have to be resolved before that Specific Plan came about. Thank you. <br />Commissioner Nagler: So there's nothing else specifically other than responses that we <br />came up with today other that the big question that's unanswered. <br />Commissioner Balch: For me, maybe it would just be for staff is how we would handle <br />this Residence 1 as Gerry put forth a very good plan to do it, and I don't want my <br />comments tonight to give it more weight to go that route, but I think that's got to be <br />addressed. <br />Chair Ritter: Okay, the only other thing I would like to see is that they do analysis of <br />office /commercial; a projection like a normal real estate analysis that is probably out <br />there already just in case there's any proposal so we know what the current and future <br />needs are based on the market studies they've done for office, residential, and retail in <br />Pleasanton. Can they do that for a segment of the town? <br />Commissioner Brown: The PDA does it. <br />Beaudin: And we also have the civic center task force analysis which is across the <br />street. We can make sure that it gets around to the commission. <br />Chair Ritter: But even when the proposal comes, just have that be part of the analysis <br />so we can understand why we might have to change it based on market needs of our <br />residents. Okay, we're good? Okay, staff, did you get enough feedback? <br />Amos: Yes, thank you. <br />Commissioner Balch: Are we at least more consistent for staff now? Are we a more <br />unified message? <br />Amos: I can say yes. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 25, 2016 Page 26 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.