My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 062619
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
PC 062619
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2019 6:08:56 PM
Creation date
8/15/2019 6:08:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
6/26/2019
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
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
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 /> Kelly Mokashi said she is a new resident to the community and referred to Number 5 of the <br /> development standards. She is speaking on maintaining the preservation of the downtown <br /> historical areas and noted that one goal states to maintain traditional character and scale when <br /> new buildings are built. She indicated that some of the recently constructed buildings <br /> downtown are disproportional when compared to existing buildings. She asked that scale, <br /> proportion, and historic quaintness be preserved in the downtown, particularly a two-story <br /> maximum. <br /> Wilson Wendt, Attorney representing the Safreno family who own 4212 First Street (Shell <br /> service station), urged the Planning Commission to follow the Task Force recommendation <br /> and City Council's recommendation that the gas station property be designated with an overlay <br /> so it can be developed for residential use. He said they have done some work on projects that <br /> would provide amenities to the community and understands their obligation, but this allows <br /> them to move forward without having to amend the recently adopted DSP. <br /> Guy Houston, representing the Safreno family and the gas station, referred to the two- and <br /> three-story buildings and said it seems the Task Force and City Council both indicate 30 feet <br /> as a limitation. He believes that a 30-foot, two-story building would be unattractive and out of <br /> proportion and asked to keep in mind the compatibility of other three-story structures next door <br /> to the gas station. The City Council has stated two stories maximum with the ability to consider <br /> additional height through a PUD. Therefore, he asked the Planning Commission to maintain <br /> the 30-foot maximum, but that three-stories within the 30-foot limit be permitted in the outlying <br /> areas, such as on First Street. <br /> Gene Finch voiced concerns with the Downtown Specific Plan review, its recommendations <br /> and what is being presented. He believes there are issues surrounding the lack of parking in <br /> the downtown area, does not want the downtown area changed, asked to keep things simple <br /> and to stop changing rules and regulations. <br /> Bryan Bowers said he is a downtown property owner and current President of the PDA. He <br /> reiterated the PDA's support for the Task Force recommendations made at the February 26 <br /> meeting and re-affirmed at the last DSP meeting. He referred to the removal of the PUD <br /> process for residential in the downtown, stating the PUD process is a long, cumbersome and <br /> sometimes expensive process. He cited change of ownership in achieving the highest and best <br /> use of property while keeping the historic charm of the downtown. <br /> The PDA is against having the PUD required for residential projects. And, while he appreciates <br /> staff's efforts in balancing competing viewpoints, they would not want a PUD for options such <br /> as new ground floor residential or if residential does not already exist since two properties side <br /> by side could have very different requirements. He also asked that outdoor seating be a <br /> Zoning Administrator (ZA) decision and not a Planning Commission decision. Lastly, requiring <br /> commercial to wrap around the corner seems like overkill where this is an issue that can be <br /> resolved by the ZA. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 27 June 26, 2019 <br />ne 26, 2019 <br />