My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 092816
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2016
>
PC 092816
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2017 2:55:30 PM
Creation date
8/11/2017 2:47:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/28/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
Grant: They're for rain protection as well so code -wise; every door requires four feet of <br />cover so they're a minimum of four feet. <br />Commissioner Balch: And my other question was that staff's report mentioned the north <br />elevation; the queueing elevation. Any comments on that or any thoughts on their <br />request to spruce up the wall to the hotel? <br />Grant: Yes, we can accommodate that. <br />Commissioner Nagler: Eric, could you go back to the site plan? So, I hate to go back <br />and talk about version five or whatever it turned out to be, but I'll just ask. It's two <br />separate buildings because of the requirement for the driveway? Is that right? <br />Grant: No, it was two separate buildings because the City really felt that by slitting the <br />buildings you got something on Owens and we were also able to screen the queueing. <br />Commissioner Nagler: So what happens if you extended A -1 further towards Larkspur <br />Drive and, I don't know if it's possible, but you weren't required to circulate the cars <br />back into the parking lot but instead, all the cars from the driveway exited out to <br />Larkspur Drive and you move the .... I'm just pretending that the parking requirement <br />isn't above.... <br />Grant: ... that there isn't one <br />Commissioner Nagler: So you extend the building. You therefore lengthen the queue. <br />You shield the queue, right? You exit the cars, as Commissioner Brown was <br />suggesting, out to Larkspur Drive. You move the dumpster and like that to some other <br />place and we then secondarily worry about the loss of parking spaces. Is that a <br />possibility? <br />Grant: Well, parking requirements are there for a reason. <br />Commissioner Nagler: Well no, just to say out loud. If, for example.... <br />Grant: ....Based on the geometry of the site, is it possible to do that? <br />Commissioner Nagler: If you weren't required to have that driveway to re- circulate the <br />cars out into the parking lot and therefore didn't take up the space of that driveway, you <br />know, exiting and therefore put a couple of more parking spaces there, right? See what <br />I'm saying? <br />Grant: Well, I understand what you're saying about exiting directly to Larkspur and in a <br />perfect world we would do that. I mean, we would have done that from Day 1. In fact, <br />one of our earlier concepts have that when we had a singular building. <br />Commissioner Nagler: It doesn't need to be a singular building. <br />Grant: I understand, but the reality is that based on the parking requirement for the <br />square footage that we're proposing and the uses that we're proposing, the parking <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 28, 2016 Page 21 of 32 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.