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
Mr. Beaudin said a PUD is a legislative change which allows for more discretion and more <br /> ability to extract from applicants. The Design Review is a more straight forward process. His <br /> final point is that if a decision is brought to the ballot, a legislative change can be brought to the <br /> ballot. A quasi-judicial decision or a more administrative decision cannot be brought to the <br /> voters after a decision is made by the City Council or the Planning Commission. <br /> ACTION: Chair Allen took a straw poll which resulted in a vote of 2-1 to strike the <br /> requirement for a PUD on all residential projects, with Chair Allen opposed. <br /> Residential Height Limits (inclusion of three-story versus two-story height limits) per <br /> Commissioner Brown: <br /> Commissioner Brown said both Commissioner Allen and Commissioner Ritter indicated earlier <br /> they do not want to require stories in the recommendations, and Chair Allen was the swing <br /> vote. <br /> Chair Allen said she agrees with the City Council recommendation, and the proposed staff <br /> position in that two stories is the standard and three stories is the exception. <br /> Commissioner Brown spoke about his work on the Planning Commission as a representative <br /> for the community at large, and residents want the character of the City to remain. <br /> Commissioner Brown made a motion to recommend including the three-story and two-story <br /> maximum against the four overlay districts which the City Council amended. <br /> Mr. Beaudin referred to agenda report page 5 of 15 and he confirmed Commissioner Brown's <br /> motion was in support of making the recommendation to the City Council consistent with their <br /> April 16 and May 7 summary in the table for height and stories. <br /> Commissioner Brown said they discussed the MU-T and agreed to recommend 36 feet and <br /> 125 FAR, and he confirmed this was what he was motioning, except without the PUD. <br /> Commissioner Ritter said he agreed with the verbiage with the exception of including about the <br /> maximum number of stories. <br /> Commissioner Brown asked if there was agreement to strike the proposed language that <br /> called out allowing additional height through a PUD; and if there was support from two <br /> Planning Commissioners for adding back the reference to maximum stories. <br /> Chair Allen stated she will second the motion with the exception she could not support the <br /> striking through a PUD. <br /> Mr. Beaudin clarified the Planning Commission was just voting on the 30 feet and two stories. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 19 of 27 June 26, 2019 <br /> want to burn staff time and <br /> resident dollars on doing PUDs for a lot of projects that are outside of the ones the Planning <br /> Commission is worried about. <br /> Chair Allen said lastly, staff indicated it was likely for Barone's to come in with design review. <br /> She asked what the difference was between Design Review and a PUD as it relates to the <br /> Planning Commission and the City Council being able to ask for amenities in return for the <br /> project. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 18 of 27 June 26, 2019 <br /> behind commercial does exist. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 17 of 27 June 26, 2019 <br /> <br /> (CEQA) process. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 16 of 27 June 26, 2019 <br /> 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 />