CCMIN021704 - Laserfiche WebLink

to whether or not parking should be located on the site. He had made a commitment with the neighbors on Walnut Drive that immediately back up to the parking lot, that Valley Park Associates would not support open parking on the development because those neighbors do not support it. The project design that is before Council this evening was the design that was seen by the neighbors as early as July 9, 2003. This design is identical in width, proportioned to the height of the building, setbacks, and the site plan, which the neighbors have supported and continue to support. The only difference between the current project design and the design that was first presented to the neighbors at various neighborhood meetings last summer are the recommendations made by staff, the peer architect or the Planning Commission. These recommendations had to do primarily with the type of windows as well as the wrought iron and the lowering of lanterns - minor cosmetic changes. The design is high quality and is deemed to be what Valley Park Associates would call a "garden office" development, given the exterior courtyard element and the residential looking element with respect to the proposed office building. If the Council desires not to have any illuminating lighting on the monument sign that would be acceptable by Valley Park Associates. He noted that the neighbors are very concerned and sensitive persons loitering and gaining access to their backyards through the buildings parking lot. Again, wanting to be sensitive to the neighborhood, Valley Park Associates would not support open parking. Ms. Ayala pointed out that the last page of the preliminary grading plan showed the parking and the four houses on Walnut Drive. She believed there was additional parking along the Arroyo del Valle and the back of the building, and asked if she was correct. Mr. Siewert said yes. He noted that the parking was in an L-shaped parking configuration. Ms. Ayala asked if there was a possibility, on a trial basis, to allow for parking in the back part of the building? Mr. Siewert said that the neighbors are very sensitive to the noise element and the potential loitering of people. Based upon his commitments to the neighbors, Valley Park Associates would not support open and public parking. Ms. Ayala referred to the idea of a gazebo and noted that the idea that was discussed during the Specific Plan was that it would overlook the Arroyo del Valle. Mr. Siewert believed the gazebo was removed from the Specific Plan based upon a recommendation from the horticulturist that prepared the report for the trees. The trees would be preserved and the recommendation was to leave that area underneath the trees in its natural state without disturbing the soils just north of where the parking lot stops. Valley Park Associates will be making modifications to the parking lot to maintain the trees. Pleasanton City Council 14 02/17/04 Minutes