2_Exhibits A, D & E - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Clark explained that the PUD process allowed different uses. Commissioner Pace thanked staff for its effort to provide background on the proposed project. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Project Architect Gabriela Marks gave a presentation and provided the history of Pad B and the requirement for 50 parking spaces, which was unfeasible for the shopping center. She referenced the expected trips generated by the project and the fact that the existing Taco Bell would be relocated to a different site within the same center, with the demolition of the oil changing facility to help accommodate for the traffic and parking. She referenced staff's desire to make the shopping center more pedestrian friendly and asked that the Commission remove the PUD restriction. Commissioner Balch asked if the applicant had read staff's rebuttal to their traffic analysis. Ms. Marks indicated she had not. Commissioner Balch discussed the trip generation and inclusion of the Taco Bell traffic. He then referenced the Greenhouse Gas emissions (GHG) referenced by the architect during the presentation and in the memo provided to the Commission. He further inquired about the statement made that the shopping center was not currently pedestrian friendly and what the architect proposed to help achieve a pedestrian friendly environment. He continued regarding parking requirements of 50 spots. Ms. Marks confirmed that emissions would be considered and additional landscaping and trees, and energy and noise efficiencies would be provided as mitigation. She questioned how one building would create a pedestrian friendly center and discussed the need for drive- through options. She offered alternative building orientation to create a more pedestrian friendly environment. She confirmed that some of the center spots were available, but not 50 spots. Property Owner and Franchisee Sandy Singh continued the presentation and explained the reason for the requested change based on the Taco Bell policy to eliminate in-line stores. He discussed the climate action plan and difficulties with implementation at the aged center. He explained the need for fast food as a convenience to Pleasanton citizens. Public comment was received by a member of the audience, who did not provide a speaker card nor her name, indicating support for the Taco Bell drive-through location. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Commissioner Balch inquired about the CAP and whether it would be enforced. He also asked if drive-throughs would be considered in Climate Action Plan 2.0. Ms. Clark responded that the City was currently working toward the Climate Action Plan 2.0 and whether the broad strategy was to prohibit drive-through locations in general. She responded that it was a policy discussion for the future. Excerpt: Draft Planning Commission Minutes, January 22, 2020 Page 2 of 5 commissions, employee and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and/or the applicant to attack, set aside, or void the approval of the project or any permit authorized hereby for the project, including without limitation, reimbursing the City its attorneys' fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice. te D Planning Commission 7of8 Noise Patrons' voices and entertainment/music within the interior of the proposed bar would be the main noise sources generated from the subject site. The proposed hours of operation for the bar are 4 p.m. to 1 a.m., seven days a week while indoor entertainment and music would occur from 4 p.m. to midnight, seven days a week. P19-0432, 310 Main Street, Suite D Planning Commission 6 of 8