16 ATTACHMENT 4 EXHIBIT D - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Pace referenced both the homes within the Irby Ranch development and those across the street from the proposed project on Stanley Boulevard and inquired about the distance between these homes and the proposed project's three-story building, as well as the usage of parking vehicles outside, as depicted in the current plan. Ms. Campbell explained as depicted in the project's current plans, the RVs and vehicles parked outside the building would be removed and additional buildings and landscaping would be added. As later depicted in Project Applicant Bryan Miranda's presentation, he provided the specific distances between the project's proposed three-story building and the homes within the Irby Ranch development and those across the street from the project on Stanley Boulevard. Commissioner Pace then inquired if the homes within the Irby Ranch development would have limited or obstructed visibility of the Arroyo by the proposed project's three-story building. Ms. Campbell stated based on the angle and position of the homes in relation to the new buildings and her own visit to the site, she did not believe visibility would be greatly obstructed. Chair Ritter inquired about the process by which the trail section was identified by the community as the number one priority. Ms. Hosterman explained the amount of public outreach done in order to establish the ranking. The trail was ranked highest between both public interest and the City Commissions, in addition to bringing the Trails Master Plan before the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Committee (BPTC) at three separate meetings. She explained that the trail was the only one that connected one side of Pleasanton to the other. On the west side, the trail was more about youth being able to utilize them to get to and from school; on the east side, more about getting to East Pleasanton, Iron Horse Trail, and Shadow Cliffs. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Project Applicant Bryan Miranda gave a presentation providing background on the proposed redevelopment of the existing facility; General Plan and Zoning designations; fulfilment of development standards; improved architecture and public views; landscaping screening; and benefits of Public Storage's reinvestment in the site. Patrick Costanzo Jr. clarified the new right-of-way, which would result in a proposed minimum setback of 22 feet. Chair Ritter disclosed that he was a prior customer of Public Storage. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Discussion Point#1: Building Massing and Height 1. Is the overall massing and scale of the proposed buildings acceptable? 2. Does the Planning Commission support the proposed third story? Commissioner Pace discussed the proposed three-story building and proximity to residential developments, which must be carefully considered. He indicated that he found the massing on the three-story building to break up the sightlines and the accommodation of coloring helpful. He stated he was in favor of the proposal to protect sightlines and visibility without disrupting the environment and residents. Commissioner O'Connor stated the project was within the Code regarding every setback and height. He stated he had visited the property to look at the different angles and did not see a Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 7 August 12, 2020