My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 071316
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2016
>
PC 071316
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2017 2:45:49 PM
Creation date
8/11/2017 2:35:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/13/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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
Beaudin: Adam and I were just discussing that. It's residential development downtown <br />period. <br />Mike Carey, Applicant described the scope, layout, and key elements of the application. <br />Commissioner Nagler: On the parking question Commissioner Allen raised, what are <br />your thoughts about that? <br />Carey: I mean, we really vetted the parking heavily when we were here last time. <br />Parking is the big issue. We worked really hard to make it all work. We thought we <br />nailed it. At the end before the workshop, we realized that technically the studios are <br />burdened with two parking spaces per studio whether they are 100 - square -foot studios <br />or 300 - square -foot studios like they are. They are tiny studios, so for me to stick to a <br />rule of an Office zoning that we're in the middle of potentially changing to C -C, the <br />properties next door have the Core Overlay which only have to do one, so everyone <br />around us has to do one. The front pieces have to do two for studio and then we talked <br />about the reality of the code allowing us to go up to four, five, six - bedroom for two <br />spaces. So Tim could flip it to two, two- bedroom units and we only have to figure out <br />four spaces. But three micro -mini studios are up for six. I don't think it's reasonable. <br />think it needs to be figured out by staff and the code amendments we're doing. Also our <br />discussion in the workshop was if we converted the front use, which we're really sticking <br />to residential on, into a commercial office use, you guys were kind of torn and all the <br />minutes say we could probably work with you and if you work on Residence 1, we could <br />maybe not hit you up for the extra parking space. That was in all of our minutes, in our <br />discussions, heavily vetted so we're hoping that because we modified it to make it a flex <br />space that we could stick with not an additional space for it. <br />We also talked that we want the market to kind of dictate that space. So whether that's <br />a house and somebody buys it and they want their home office there like we all do at <br />our house, or they really want to put a sign up and call it "Tim's Architecture" I want it to <br />be whatever the market demands, right? So we don't want to mandate it micro into a <br />sense that it has to be this so therefore if you have a home office in your house, you <br />don't have to add extra space. I think that should be left alone too and we're working <br />with the studios. We don't want to move them. We want to keep them 300 square feet <br />and we think they're satisfied with one like the other properties would be allowed one. <br />So that's it. Thank you guys. <br />Tim Ward, Architect: A couple of things —and I kind of apologize that we made this <br />vision of adding more space to the Residence 1, and I'm not sure if you have that aerial <br />view of the revised residence? It was kind of a 3 -D thing. Okay, and I think that's a <br />great improvement. The two fit together really well, and so from that perspective I think <br />it was really constructive that Natalie kind of bugged us about this and you mentioned it <br />in your workshop and we appreciate that. In regards to the materials, I think the key <br />thing that I was trying to do and I think is important is to get a variety of materials there <br />so we don't get a monolithic sort of block. And whether its asphalt shingles or metal <br />roof or different colored asphalt, it needs to be broken up, and likewise with the bays <br />that we use some metal on. I think there are other materials that are optional that <br />probably do fit into the guidelines so I don't think that's a real problem. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 13, 2016 Page 15 of 38 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.