Laserfiche WebLink
critical spaces close to BART and the potential stimulus for the mall. He expressed concern <br /> with the potential impact on traffic. <br /> Commissioner Allen stated she agreed with the other two Commissioners but did not feel <br /> comfortable answering the question until there was an economic analysis, whether by the <br /> Planning Commission or City Council. She also stated the City of Pleasanton had a lot less <br /> retail than neighboring cities Dublin and Livermore and that the COVID-19 pandemic was an <br /> opportunity to invest in retail opportunities that looked different than that traditionally imagined. <br /> She stated she was not sure if there was a better project for the space but that an economic <br /> analysis would still be the responsible thing to do. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor stated he was not opposed to the rezone or land use change, nor the <br /> economic analysis. He mentioned retail was suffering and trying to add more retail into areas <br /> that already had a lot might hurt the City, but the project was well outside high retail areas and <br /> the mall was outstanding. <br /> Chair Ritter echoed the other Commissioners and requested consideration of the cost of 10x <br /> Genomics leaving Pleasanton. He stated he believed it was the perfect land area for the <br /> project and it fit well with the proposed redevelopment at Stoneridge Mall. <br /> Discussion Point #2: <br /> 2. What amenities and mitigations should the applicant consider providing to <br /> support the proposed FAR? <br /> Commissioner Allen suggested the Planning Commission determine the commensurate <br /> appropriate value for doubling density and applying it where the City needed it, similar to <br /> Workday and Irby Ranch. She expressed her hope that the City would get value and that it <br /> would need to be big for the strategic site. <br /> Commissioner Brown discussed the proposed phasing and suggested the Floor Area Ratio <br /> (FAR) be tied to Buildings 2 and 3. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor agreed with Commissioner Brown that if the buildings were phased <br /> then the amenity requests should also be phased. He also mentioned that he was not always <br /> comfortable deciding what the amenity should be if it is not directly on site. He suggested the <br /> City Council prioritize its needs. <br /> Commissioner Brown inquired whether there were any traffic improvements in the area or <br /> other project priorities that might be appropriate to consider. Mr. Tassano mentioned the cycle <br /> track ring around the outside of Stoneridge Mall and a trail that connected the campus to the <br /> mall. <br /> Chair Ritter concurred with the concept and discussed the possibility of a fund for the cycle <br /> track. <br /> Discussion Point #3: <br /> 3. Is the overall massing, scale and setbacks of the proposed buildings acceptable, <br /> and should the heights of buildings 2/3, in particular, be modified? <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 8 November 18, 2020 <br />truggling, even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. He stated he saw the project <br /> as a reinvestment in a company dedicated to Pleasanton. He also mentioned he liked seeing <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 8 November 18, 2020 <br />nton. Mr. Jencek confirmed that to be the case and that the company was <br /> interested in growing together with the City. <br /> Commissioner Allen asked if the company was planning on keeping all three locations in the <br /> City or if they would consolidate after the opening of the proposed campus. Mr. Jencek stated <br /> the idea was new net growth. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 8 November 18, 2020 <br />Approvals or that could prevent or <br /> 4412928_2 -10- <br /> the Project, which list shall include the following items: <br /> 4412928_2 -8- <br />