My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 081220
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2020
>
PC 081220
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/26/2020 8:17:51 PM
Creation date
8/26/2020 8:17:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/12/2020
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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 Pace referenced both the homes within the Irby Ranch development and those <br /> across the street from the proposed project on Stanley Boulevard and inquired about the <br /> distance between these homes and the proposed project's three-story building, as well as the <br /> usage of parking vehicles outside, as depicted in the current plan. Ms. Campbell explained as <br /> depicted in the project's current plans, the RVs and vehicles parked outside the building would <br /> be removed and additional buildings and landscaping would be added. As later depicted in <br /> Project Applicant Bryan Miranda's presentation, he provided the specific distances between <br /> the project's proposed three-story building and the homes within the Irby Ranch development <br /> and those across the street from the project on Stanley Boulevard. Commissioner Pace then <br /> inquired if the homes within the Irby Ranch development would have limited or obstructed <br /> visibility of the Arroyo by the proposed project's three-story building. Ms. Campbell stated <br /> based on the angle and position of the homes in relation to the new buildings and her own visit <br /> to the site, she did not believe visibility would be greatly obstructed. <br /> Chair Ritter inquired about the process by which the trail section was identified by the <br /> community as the number one priority. Ms. Hosterman explained the amount of public <br /> outreach done in order to establish the ranking. The trail was ranked highest between both <br /> public interest and the City Commissions, in addition to bringing the Trails Master Plan before <br /> the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Committee (BPTC) at three separate meetings. She <br /> explained that the trail was the only one that connected one side of Pleasanton to the other. <br /> On the west side, the trail was more about youth being able to utilize them to get to and from <br /> school; on the east side, more about getting to East Pleasanton, Iron Horse Trail, and Shadow <br /> Cliffs. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED <br /> Project Applicant Bryan Miranda gave a presentation providing background on the proposed <br /> redevelopment of the existing facility; General Plan and Zoning designations; fulfilment of <br /> development standards; improved architecture and public views; landscaping screening; and <br /> benefits of Public Storage's reinvestment in the site. Patrick Costanzo Jr. clarified the new <br /> right-of-way, which would result in a proposed minimum setback of 22 feet. <br /> Chair Ritter disclosed that he was a prior customer of Public Storage. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br /> Discussion Point #1: Building Massing and Height <br /> 1. Is the overall massing and scale of the proposed buildings acceptable? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission support the proposed third story? <br /> Commissioner Pace discussed the proposed three-story building and proximity to residential <br /> developments, which must be carefully considered. He indicated that he found the massing on <br /> the three-story building to break up the sightlines and the accommodation of coloring helpful. <br /> He stated he was in favor of the proposal to protect sightlines and visibility without disrupting <br /> the environment and residents. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor stated the project was within the Code regarding every setback and <br /> height. He stated he had visited the property to look at the different angles and did not see a <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 7 August 12, 2020 <br />at section of town for completion of the trail. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 7 August 12, 2020 <br />