_Minutes_May 26, 2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commission. Mr. Tassano confirmed that any modifications would be to the mall side, not the 10x Genomics side, which staff had accounted for. Commissioner Allen asked if the $1 million contribution would be adjusted for inflation. Ms. Clark stated there was no proposal to include an inflation factor. Commissioner Allen requested that be considered in the future. She then inquired about impact fees for affordable housing and traffic. Ms. Clark responded that the applicant would be required to pay development impact fees and that some were offset by credit associated with previous retail uses on the site. She stated that impact fees would inflate in the future. Commissioner Allen asked if the cost difference for affordable housing fees, which would have been paid previously and were likely minimal versus current requirements, would be accounted for. Ms. Clark stated both credits and fees (for Phase 1) would be paid at current rates, which was standard for all projects. Commissioner Allen discussed the exterior insulation finishing system (EIFS), which was cladding material around the building, and inquired if it was an industry standard material and the reputation for the durability for the proposed type of commercial building. Ms. Clark responded that EIFS was a material used widely throughout the Bay Area for both residential and commercial applications. She explained it was an engineered material, with a good reputation for durability, and that she had had the opportunity to visit a project using EIFS and research potential issues and was satisfied by that research that the durability would be adequate. Commissioner Allen questioned how the Commission could approve the design details for one building without seeing the entire project (future phases). She expressed concern with the gray, "massive" design. Mr. Luchini stated the applicant could provide information on the phasing and aesthetics. Ms. Clark explained that the Commission was today reviewing the aesthetics of Building 1 only and would consider the design for future phases further in the process. Chair Brown referenced the three-dimensional view of the architecture and stated the building aesthetics appeared to have a lot of chrome. He asked if that was an accurate representation and expressed concern with the amount of glare that could result. Mr. Luchini deferred to the architect regarding the accuracy of the depiction of the materials. Planning and Permit Center Manager Melinda Denis stated the images were placeholders for Buildings 2 and 3 and the design and materials would be finalized during future phases. Chair Brown questioned the materials presented in the architecture image. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Applicant Ben Hindson, 10x Genomics, provided a brief introduction of the company and background on the lab setting. He expressed appreciation for the City's support and expanding the company's headquarters in Pleasanton. Architect Brian Jencek, HOK, provided a presentation regarding the existing site, location and the ability to create an enhanced campus for 10x Genomics. He referenced the Building 1 plan layout and the full layout of the site, highlighting the number of trees to remain and the new trees to be planted to create a lush landscape. He discussed the future parking structure off Stoneridge Mall Road and the benefits of the location. He referenced the queuing details and site circulation plan. He discussed efforts to remain compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 8 May 26, 2021 k to that level of detail for the circulation, but staff would work with Simon Properties to ensure they were appropriately located in the design. Commissioner Pace asked if the driveway finalizations would come back before the Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 8 May 26, 2021