PC 112906 - Laserfiche WebLink

She asked whether there was some difference in Livermore and Pleasanton that would require a building in Pleasanton to have four extra feet. Mr. Otto noted that he would not be in a position to comment on Livermore's Code requirements. With respect to this project, he stated that the applicant required 25 feet of inside cleazance for basketball use, and beyond that, the structural requirements included beams, roof slope and duct work for air conditioning and heating. For aesthetic reasons, the applicant designed the walls to extend an additional three feet beyond the roofline. Ms. Decker added that the pazapet would screen the photovoltaic system panels that the Church may eventually install on the roof. Acting Chairperson Fox noted that in the 1998 Master Plan, the original thought was to have the gymnasium and classroom buildings on the blazik lot between the Church and Nielsen Pazk and it was appealed to the City Council with a 3-2 decision with Michelotti, Ayala, and Dennis supporting its approval and Pico and Tarver dissenting. She noted that the lot next to Rheem Drive, now proposed for the parish center/gymnasium, was originally supposed to be the site for the school. There was discussion from those minutes regazding open space between the school and the neighborhood because there needed to be a lazge play area for the 300 students proposed. She asked staff whether the play azea envisioned in 1998 is approximately where the gymnasium is now being proposed. Mr. Otto replied that the plan shows an outline of the conceptual footprint of the building at that location. No play azeas were shown. Commissioner Pearce asked for clarification regazding pazking in the staff report. She asked for clazification in the discrepancies in pazking spaces. The report indicated that 435 spaces were in the approved Master Plan at buildout, but because 11 fewer spaces currently exist on-site compazed to the 3221isted on the 1998 Master Plan, staff reduced the buildout parking spaces by 11 spaces. Mr. Otto replied that he was not sure where the lost spaces went but indicated it could be related to handicapped spaces or some changes made during the building permit process such as location of utilities. Commissioner Pearce also asked for a copy of the parking agreement. Acting Chairperson Fox indicated that she had another question about pazking. She indicated that she had visited the Church's pazking lot at 6:45 p.m. for two Sundays, and the on-site pazking was full and there were vehicles leaving the pazking lot already pazking across the street as well as within the neighborhood. She asked whether any City staff was present at any of the Sunday evening pazking counts and asked how vehicles were counted that had to leave the full pazking lotto pazk in the surrounding neighborhood and surrounding off-site pazking lots. Mr. Otto indicated staff was not present during the pazking counts and that this was done by the Church. Acting Chairperson Fox explained that the public hearing would be open. She indicated that members of the public other than the applicant would be limited to afive-minute time limit. She reminded the members the audience that sometimes comments can get somewhat a little emotional and that some in the audience may agree or disagree with PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 29, 2006 Page 7 of 28