My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 020806
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
PC 020806
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:23:26 PM
Creation date
7/12/2007 9:13:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/8/2006
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 020806
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
~+ Commissioner Blank liked the general idea of this project and liked the glass column <br />detail at the entry. He did not like the institutional signage at all and did not believe it <br />was inviting. He understood the cost concerns with respect to the bricks but would like <br />to see the bricks extended more. He believed that staff should work to bring the design <br />more in conformance with the Downtown Design Guidelines. He wanted to ensure the <br />restrooms had porcelain fixtures. He believed that every restroom should have a <br />changing table. He believed there should be some piping or fixtures for WiFi coverage. <br />He believed the City Council should look at elements the Planning Commission would <br />normally look at in a design review. He would like to see story boards, accurate color, <br />and materials boards, as well as viewscapes and elevations. <br />Chairperson Arkin noted that he was very excited about this project and did not want to <br />slow it down. He liked how the space was designed, especially the hourglass-type <br />hallway. He supported the installation of a family bathroom downstairs. He expressed <br />concern that if this project were not built in conformance with the Downtown Specific <br />Plan, future projects would use it as a reason not to conform with the Specific Plan either. <br />He was surprised that the design group had not seen the Downtown Specific Plan. He <br />would like the final design to return to the Planning Commission for a true design <br />approval. He suggested the addition of gazdens, perhaps theme gardens with students' <br />involvement. <br />Ms. Decker noted that the Commissioners' comments would be included in the staff <br />(~ report for the project when it comes before the City Council in March. <br />Commissioner Fox noted that if there had been a staff recommendation to approve this <br />existing design, she would not have been able to support it. <br />No action was taken. <br />7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS <br />O~enine Doors Before Meetines <br />Commissioner Blank requested that the front doors be opened by 6:45 p.m. on meeting <br />nights. Ms. Decker noted that she would ensure that would occur. <br />Snotorno Letter <br />Commissioner Roberts advised that she was very disturbed by the Spotornos' letter that <br />was included in the packet, stating that negotiations were going on with Greenbriar <br />Homes Communities without their knowledge. She noted that some members of the <br />Council were negotiating with landowners and she did not believe that was right. She felt <br />uncomfortable that the City was engaging in discussions privately and was interested in <br />the content of those discussions. She thought that it may be a misunderstanding. <br />~" <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Februazy 8, 2006 Page 14 of 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.