Laserfiche WebLink
Chair Brown reiterated his suggestion for commercial ground floor along Lots 10 and 11. He <br /> stated he was not opposed to residential in the rear although the DSP stated they should look <br /> to leverage the Arroyo in creative ways. He stated he was not prepared to discuss parking <br /> because there was not yet a compelling site layout that met the intent of the DSP or zoning. <br /> Discussion Point #3: Building Massing and Architecture <br /> A) Is the proposed two-story building massing and architectural design acceptable? <br /> Commissioner Allen reiterated the design for the residential community was beautiful and <br /> hoped to find that type of design in Pleasanton. She stated she would leave the architectural <br /> design for the new layout to the architect. She stated the minimum commercial space needed <br /> to go beyond the front facing buildings on St. John Street and should include the space <br /> currently occupied for public use, including Barone's Restaurant, the cabana, entertainment <br /> space under the 2009 CUP, and associated required parking. She stated it was necessary to <br /> retain the existing public use of retail even if not currently zoned as retail. Chair Brown asked <br /> for clarification on the term "public use." Commissioner Allen clarified the public was accessing <br /> the space for entertainment, restaurant usage and events by invitation of the owners. <br /> Commissioner Gaidos stated the designs were nice looking and he had no problem with the <br /> two-story aspects of the design. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor stated the design was fine as a residential development, but the <br /> commercial should be retained. He stated the new design with commercial would have to be <br /> reconsidered. <br /> Commissioner Pace discussed the adjacent properties and opportunities to develop up with a <br /> multi-use project. He stated the need for commercial use on the first floor, whether one large <br /> building or multiple smaller spaces with upward development as a potential solution. <br /> Chair Brown stated that Commissioner Allen covered the amount of commercial space aptly <br /> and he referenced Page 13 of the staff report. He expressed hesitation with ensuring the <br /> commercial space was sustainable. He mentioned the public comments regarding mixed <br /> vendor buildings allowing for a unique gathering space for commercial with a smaller footprint <br /> to promote lower costs and a more stable venue. He stated two story building massing was <br /> appropriate and three story could be fine since it was a transitional space. He stated he would <br /> hold judgment until he saw a plan that met the intent of the DSP and Council direction. <br /> Discussion Point #4: Other Information <br /> A) Is there additional information needed to assist the Commission in its decision on <br /> the proposal? <br /> Commissioner Pace asked if the applicant had asked if the City was interested in purchasing <br /> the space, or at least part of it for City purposes. Ms. Clark stated it was not a conversation <br /> that had been had with the applicant or property owner. <br /> Commissioner Allen requested a tree analysis and total square footage currently used for <br /> retail. Ms. Clark asked if she wanted to know the total size of the property, the building, plus all <br /> outdoor areas. Commissioner Allen clarified that she wanted the square footage on the <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 of 12 March 24, 2021 <br />e's Blacksmith Square. He referenced the City of San Jose's <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 12 March 24, 2021 <br />Chair Brown confirmed that <br /> the discussion about the ground floor use would be restricted to the restaurant portion of the <br /> property. Ms. Clark clarified the active ground floor requirement of the DSP applies to <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 12 March 24, 2021 <br />