My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 011007
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
PC 011007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:28:53 PM
Creation date
8/17/2007 10:04:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
1/10/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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 O’Connor believed that it was too big for the lot as proposed. He believed <br />that with the pilates studio, there was a lot of activity surrounding that building and was <br />unsure whether there would be adequate parking. He suggested eliminating the pilates <br />studio, but was unsure how much money had been invested in its renovation and whether <br />that was a viable option. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox believed that the building was too big for the existing lot and would like <br />to see a less massive design. <br /> <br />Architectural theme <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank personally preferred the Mission style rather than the Downtown <br />style but believed it should be peer reviewed by an architect conversant in Mission style <br />architecture. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce agreed with Commissioner Blank and believed the Mission style <br />was unique to that street and blended with the residential units on the street. She would <br />like to see a peer review to ensure that the features and details made the building look <br />like it belonged on the street. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson believed the architectural theme should be in keeping with the rest <br />of the street, which would make an argument for the Mission style. He requested a <br />photomontage from Main Street. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor believed the Mission style should be retained. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox noted that she would like to see a different style than Mission in that <br />part of town and that she liked the design of the building at 325 Ray Street. Mr. Iserson <br />noted that the building at 325 Ray Street was an excellent example of Mission <br />Style/Spanish-style architecture. She noted that she liked the Victorian or Queen Anne <br />style, which would look less like a modern condominium complex and more like the <br />houses on Neal Street. She noted that she was not a particular fan of the Mission <br />architectural style. <br /> <br />Should all the units be live-work units? <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank believed all the units should be live-work units. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce believed all the units should be live-work units and that it would be <br />a distinctive and unique feature in the Downtown area. She would also like to see a <br />second workshop on this project. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson would not be in favor of any restaurants in this area. He would like <br />to see some focus toward business incubators in this location as described by the <br />applicant; perhaps a 500-700-square-foot facility for venture-funded companies. He <br />would like to see the living and work units tied together on the deed. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 10, 2007 Page 15 of 27 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.