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
475 and 493 St. John Street, which was not in their letter. The Chamber represents over 725 <br /> businesses throughout the City and all they hear is that parking is not sufficient downtown and <br /> that more parking is needed to keep downtown vibrant. There are also concerns with the <br /> added PUD process which constrains development and they would like this removed. <br /> Regarding the process, he recognized it as unfortunate that some of the stakeholders that are <br /> now speaking up were not involved in the beginning. In closing, he relayed that the Chamber <br /> supports the Task Force's recommendations and asked that more parking downtown be <br /> discussed. <br /> Peter MacDonald asked that the Planning Commission vote "no" on the draft DSP. He was <br /> generally in support of the comments submitted by the Chamber of Commerce and the <br /> Pleasanton Downtown Association (PDA), Mike Carey and most of what the Task Force <br /> recommended at their last meeting. He said the plan's fatal flaw is that there is no mention of <br /> additional parking in the downtown area. The plan proposes to manage the parking problem by <br /> having shorter time limits for parking, and until the specific plan is revised to provide for <br /> substantial public parking in the downtown core, he asked to vote "no." <br /> Property Owner Shashi Raj said his architect, Tony Meo, has worked on hundreds of projects <br /> now and in the past and thinks foot traffic is what adds to the vitality of any neighborhood, as <br /> well as adequate parking, safety, and mixed use, and he favors mixed zoning in the downtown <br /> neighborhoods. <br /> Tony Meo, Architect, said he would love to live and work in the downtown and patronize <br /> restaurants, stores and businesses. He suggested having a shuttle to downtown from other <br /> areas and to allow mixed use and Live Work to encourage more people to live in the <br /> downtown. He referred to two- and three-story buildings and, commented that some two-story <br /> buildings can appear more massive than three-story buildings, and that three-story buildings <br /> can be better architecturally articulated, and hopes that three-story buildings will be permitted <br /> in downtown Pleasanton. <br /> Paulette Goodrich said she is a long-time resident of Pleasanton, is retired and was involved in <br /> a marketing career and active service with local organizations. She spoke of what Pleasanton <br /> used to look like in the 1970s, and voiced concern that the Planning Commission has turned <br /> down the City Council's height recommendations and concerns about residential uses. Having <br /> lived and worked in San Francisco, she indicated her position against having three-story <br /> structures on Main Street because of wind, shade, and aesthetics and she asked to keep the <br /> downtown core on Main Street as is. <br /> Jan Batcheller, DSP Task Force member, said there are things being presented in this plan <br /> that were not brought up during the Task Force meetings and not fully understood by the Task <br /> Force. The City used to want to hear from stakeholders, but now stakeholders are considered <br /> to have a conflict of interest and not allowed to be involved. She agrees with most of what the <br /> Chamber of Commerce and PDA has communicated, and they are key stakeholders. She <br /> referred to parking apps which indicate where parking is available, and she asked for a right to <br /> do business ordinance. She strongly disagrees with the PUD recommendation, stating there <br /> are more costs, time and staff involved. She also agrees with the Chamber and PDA regarding <br /> building height and Floor Area Ratio (FAR). <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 27 June 26, 2019 <br />