PC 090920 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Allen moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Commissioner O'Connor seconded the motion. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Allen, Balch, Brown, O'Connor, and Ritter NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The Actions of the City Council were approved, as submitted. The Actions of the Zoning Administrator were approved, as submitted. Resolution PC-2020-10 approving Cases P20-0623 and P20-0624 was adopted, as motioned. MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC 4. Public Comment from the audience regarding items not listed on the agenda — Speakers are encouraged to limit comments to 3 minutes. There were no members of the audience wishing to address the Commission. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS There were no public hearing items or other matters. MATTERS FOR COMMISSION'S REVIEW/ACTION/INFORMATION 5. Reports from Meetings Attended (e.g., Committee, Task Force, etc.) Commissioner Allen reported on her attendance at the Committee on Energy and the Environment; she requested the survey being sent to Pleasanton residents be provided to the Commissioners so they could assist with distribution. Commissioners Allen, Balch and Chair Ritter discussed their attendance at the special meeting with the Chamber of Commerce to discuss 21st Century Policing in Pleasanton. 6. Future Planning Calendar Planning and Permit Center Manager Melinda Denis gave a brief overview of future items for the Commission's review. MATTERS INITIATED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS Chair Ritter mentioned Burger King's new "pandemic proof" drive-thru where customers first place their order by phone and then show up to retrieve their food, suggesting it as a potential solution to Chick-Fil-A's queuing line at their drive-thru. Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 3 September 9, 2020 the final design. Discussion Point #4: 7. Is there additional information needed to assist the Commission in its decision on the proposal? Commissioner Allen requested feedback from the Pleasanton Downtown Association (PDA). Commissioner Balch requested additional information on a single lift and tandem parking. He asked if the applicant could reduce commercial on the front property to reduce the parking requirements. Ms. Campbell explained that, under the DSP, there could be no net loss in commercial square footage. Commissioner Balch added that he respected the points of the other Commissioners and felt the lift was a creative solution. He reiterated there was no parking structure, though money has been collected for it, and additional parking in downtown was necessary. He expressed his hope the applicant would come back with a design that addressed the majority's desires. Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 9 August 26, 2020 nning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 9 August 26, 2020 Unit (ADU). Ms. Clark explained it was not an accessory dwelling to a residential building on site. Commissioner Balch requested further clarification on what configurations would be considered ground floor residential. Ms. Clark explained a story or two above a garage was considered ground floor residential. A residential unit above a commercial would not be considered ground floor residential or be subject to those related policy requirements. Commissioner Balch pointed out page 53 of the DSP. Ms. Clark suggested any effort to circumvent the ground floor residential parking requirement (such as elevating the unit, would Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 9 August 26, 2020