My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 10/26/88
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
PC 10/26/88
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/1/2013 3:43:38 PM
Creation date
4/13/2007 2:35:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/26/1988
DOCUMENT NAME
PC102688
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
Mark Hartman of the law offices of Miller, Starr and Regalia, <br />101 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 401, Walnut Creek, presented a <br />letter to the Commission, staff, and recording secretary. He <br />represented Independence Savings and Loan Association, who owns <br />real property on Johnson Drive adjacent to the PacTel property. <br />Independence has serious objections concerning the proposed <br />vacating of Hradley Drive, traffic impacts, the height of the <br />proposed buildings, design factors, and the elevated artwork. <br />They urged the careful redesign of the proposed PacTel <br />development. <br />Commissioner Mahern asked what Independence anticipates in <br />putting on their property. Mr. Hartman said it is anticipated <br />to be office buildings. <br />Mr. Swift said that most of his concerns will be addressed in <br />the staff report. <br />Richard Gerky, 604 Allbrook Circle, stated his property would <br />face the project. He was not pleased with the height of the <br />buildings or the towers which seemed to be more Aztec than <br />Mediterrean. <br />Commissioner Mahern said that she liked the curvature of the <br />building and had no problem with the iinear effect. She felt <br />the Myers project was one of the best in town and felt that <br />PacTel 's should conform to it. She did not like the towers with <br />the Aztec sunburst look; she felt the colors should go along <br />with what is already there. She felt it was too modern; had too <br />much flair; and did not like the grillwork. <br />Commissioner Hoyt objected to the linear look; he felt the <br />design was overpowering and did not fit in with the er.isting <br />structure. He thought it had a dated look and not desirable for <br />that particular part of town. <br />Commissioner Hovingh agreed with Commissioner Hoyt regarding the <br />linear Iook. He added that he did not care for the palm trees, <br />the towers and sunburst which he felt gave it a crown look. He <br />thought signs should be wall-mounted; he was concerned with the <br />size of the overhang and felt it would allow too much sun into <br />the building. He felt it was also too far for shoppers to walk. <br />Commissioner Tarver also shared the concerns about the length of <br />the building. He did not mind the grillwork; was not <br />particularly opposed to the design but did not like the idea of <br />a 3~ foot sign. He liked the curvature of the building and felt <br />perhaps more could be incorporated. His biggest concern was the <br />overall length. <br />Chairman Michelotti said she went to the site. She was very <br />concerned about the iength of the project. She thought the <br />curvature was good and the colors acceptable; thought the towers <br />gave a candy-cane effect; she liked the grillwork but not to the <br />Page 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.