Laserfiche WebLink
foot building and the necessary parking to support that size building. That is not what is <br />being promoted to the neighborhood with regard to parking, truffle. etc. He felt the <br />choices were to approve a project of 750,000 square feet with associated parking, or <br />approve a project of 960,000 squarc feet with different parking standards. He felt the <br />object was to limit the traffic impacts of the use. That is what he is trying to do and staff <br />appears to say that is not possible. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said the parking issues can be dealt with when the actual plans come <br />belbre the Council. The Planning Director can then say 3,200 parking spaces are <br />mmecessary for this type of use. It is questionable whether Council can impose limits on <br />parking at the PUD stage. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala suggested imposing conditions regarding employee density and the <br />mixture of uses, such as rosearch and development/light manufacturing/office/ <br />administration. That would provide a comfort level in the event PE Biosystems is not the <br />buyer of the property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush agreed it is within Council's discretion to determine types of uses. In <br />that way if the sale of the property to PE Biosystems falls through, then another buyer <br />would have to adhere to the mixture of uses. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked if that was in accordance with the General Plan designation <br />for this property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swit~ alereed Council can do that and that would affect the number of parking <br />spaces required. The difficulty here is you don't know precisely what the various <br />components will be. You could set a goal of employee density. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelntti believed the parking and mixture of uses could be addressed at the <br />dcsign review stage. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift agreed this is a master plan for the PUD and the project will have to <br />come back to Council for further review. There are lh'ther opportunities to address <br />concerns about the mix of uses, etc. <br /> <br />Mr. Roush suggested using a '~goal" rather than a mandate. <br /> <br /> Ms. Miehelotti said that would still give the company flexibility under the <br />guidelines for difllerent phases. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver preferred to lock in conditions rather than debate what a goal <br />means at a later date. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti asked, if this is approved, when would development of the <br />property pmceed after escrow closes? <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 14 07/11/00 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />