My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 06/28/1995
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
PC 06/28/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/10/2017 3:57:00 PM
Creation date
3/30/2005 1:55:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
6/28/1995
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 06/28/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />A traffic study was prepared by the applicant, confirming staff's belief that there would be <br />low traffic impact. The City Traffic Engineer felt the additional traffic would meet the <br />City's standards. <br /> <br />The zoning of this parcel is Commercial/Office, and generally this type of facility is located <br />in a Commercial-Industrial zoning. Staff feels this use on this site would be, at best, <br />innocuous. The strong neighborhood opposition suggests that this would not be a compatible <br />use in the neighborhood. The best location would be away from a residential area. Staff <br />feels other uses would be better suited to this parcel, such as the proposed senior center, <br />small garden offices, or a single user office building. Staff feels single-family residential use <br />probably would not be desirable considering it is bordered on three sides by major <br />thoroughfares; however, it would probably be appropriate to develop townhouses on the site, <br />which can be clustered to avoid traffic, noise, and primary impacts. <br /> <br />Staff has determined that this project fails to meet five of the seven PUD considerations. <br />Because of this, staff feels this application should be denied. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wright clarified from staff that an office building use could be set back <br />further from the street and it would also block views of the ridge. <br /> <br />Commissioners Wright, McGuirk, and Hovingh, and Chairman Lutz noted they have met <br />with the applicant. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh reviewed the history of this parcel in that a two-story office building <br />was approved in 1981, a retirement center was approved, and an apartment project was <br />proposed but not approved. This site has been approved for a senior housing project, <br />whereas this application has not be approved. <br /> <br />Commissioner McGuirk discussed the monitoring of the storage sites with Mr. Knuppe. Mr. <br />Knuppe proposed monitoring the storage facility yearly. Mr. Iserson noted a condition so <br />stating the City would review the facility's operations. Mr. Beougher advised the City can <br />only monitor the facility's contents through the search warrant process. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED <br /> <br />Michael Knuppe represented his family's application to construct a AAAAA Rent-a-Space <br />self-storage facility. He introduced his brother, sister, and wife who are also involved in the <br />project. He then presented video and slide presentations which addressed the concerns of the <br />residents. <br /> <br />Robert Siegel of New Orleans, who does location studies for mini storage facilities, gave <br />statistics that the industry is experiencing outstanding growth with the increase of square <br />footage of storage space per capita. The industry is also changing from locating near <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br /> <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />June 28, 1995 <br /> <br />- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.