My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
_Minutes_June 26, 2019
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
07-24
>
_Minutes_June 26, 2019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2019 9:59:55 AM
Creation date
7/17/2019 9:59:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
7/24/2019
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
Commissioner Brown said the Task Force recommendation talks about 50 feet commercial on <br /> the frontage on Main Street and side streets, whereas the City Council broke it down into <br /> downtown commercial which, by definition would include those corner ones and the mixed-use <br /> transitional addresses Peters Avenue. The whole point of transitional is that there can be <br /> mixed-use. <br /> Commissioner Ritter stated the Task Force voted 9-0 on ground floor residential use. <br /> Chair Allen noted that two months before the Task Force voted at its February meeting, it had <br /> directed almost the opposite: to support absolutely no ground floor residential downtown. <br /> Commissioner Brown said the point is both the February 26 Task Force and April/May City <br /> Council recommendations are allowing ground floor residential and commercial. The question <br /> is whether or not you want to break it down by downtown commercial or a generic 50-foot <br /> recommendation for commercial frontage. In both cases, it allows residential behind <br /> commercial and trying to restrict residential on Main Street. <br /> Chair Allen said the question is that on a corner lot there is a Salt Craft-type project and <br /> ground floor residential behind the St. Mary's Street side on that project. What you have is all <br /> residential right on the street front for Peters Avenue and at least two other long properties like <br /> those on Mr. Beaudin's list, including the mortgage company across the street that is almost <br /> the same lot size as where Salt Craft is located. <br /> To be clear, if the Planning Commission was to allow the long side of that corner to go all <br /> residential, they would end up turning the east side of Peters Avenue into a predominantly <br /> residential area and not giving it an opportunity to go more commercial. She thinks the City <br /> Council clearly wants the commercial streets they are trying to protect for commercial to be <br /> commercial. If residential does not fit behind there then the lot does not make sense for <br /> residential, and this is where she comes out. <br /> Commissioner Brown said to be honest, the City Council's definition with the same intent is a <br /> better definition because it is clearer and broken down, but this is just his view. He thinks in <br /> both cases they are sending a message they are allowing residential behind commercial, but <br /> they do not front the main commercial street. <br /> Chair Allen asked if Commissioner Brown was saying that on a corner lot both sides need to <br /> be fronted with commercial. <br /> Commissioner Brown stated this is a question specific to Downtown Commercial as it relates <br /> to Mixed-Use Transitional. He thought the Planning Commission should not prevent someone <br /> if they have a lot that fronts two streets on Peters Avenue to not have housing facing the <br /> street, because that is in alignment with the Downtown Design Guidelines. They want front <br /> doors facing streets, and he was not keen on wrapping around on Peters Avenue of <br /> commercial and having impractical residential behind. <br /> Chair Allen said her read of some comments from staff and the City Council was that the <br /> streets including the east side of Peters Avenue are in the defined area and residential is not <br /> on the street front. She stated Mr. Beaudin had answered that twice when asked by <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 13 of 27 June 26, 2019 <br />d disappointment with what was being presented, stating the PDA Vitality <br /> Committee began meeting and red-lining the 2002 DSP in 2013. They provided it to staff in <br /> 2014 and have been awaiting this process. She said although there have been wins, there <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 27 June 26, 2019 <br />