My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 04/08/1998
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
PC 04/08/1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2017 3:59:10 PM
Creation date
10/7/2008 9:26:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/8/1998
DOCUMENT NAME
04/08/1998
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
Chair Cooper asked whether there are any plans to have a traffic light at the intersection of Del Valle <br />Parkway. Mr. Higdon stated that the plan is to coordinate Stanley Boulevazd and Del Valle Parkway to <br />- have signals at both places. He noted that it will not be included in this project but rather under the <br />Capital Improvement Projects. <br />PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED <br />Brad Hirst, 1811 Santa Rita Road, #128, represented Mt. Diablo Bank. He introduced the architect for <br />the project, the branch manager of the bank, and the chairman of the boazd. He noted that the bank has <br />been successful in this City and wants to get a new site to better serve the public. He noted that the site <br />is actually just over half-an-acre since the County took easements for the right-of-way. He also <br />commented that the applicant will dedicate 10.5% for street improvements. He also commented that the <br />proposed building would be 13,382 square feet and not 19,000 as listed in the staff report. <br />Mr. Hirst reported that Mt. Diablo National Bank is not a major corporate chain bank, but rather a local <br />community bank. He also stated that they considered adrive-through window, but gave up on the idea <br />because they felt they could not make it work for maximum customer service. <br />Mr. Hirst stated that the bank wants to keep the proposed six-foot fence because it delineates the bank <br />property from the other property. He also noted that landscaping has been proposed along the fence line. <br />Peter Shutts, 4133 Mohr Avenue, stated that he is the architect for the project. He presented a materials <br />board to the Commission. He stated that he and the applicant worked very hard to make the building an <br />attractive gateway to the City. He presented an illustration showing the proposed building from all <br />sides. In addition, Mr. Shutts described the proposed window modification and presented sketches of it. <br />He fully described the proposed building and the architecture. <br />Mr. Hirst stated that parking is extremely important to the bank, and they would like to provide as many <br />as possible. He commented that the applicant is working diligently to acquire anoff--site location for <br />additional parking. He asked whether the Commission would consider granting a reduction or a <br />deferment of the in-lieu parking fee given the applicant's street dedication. He noted that the applicant <br />would also be pleased if the code were modified. <br />Commissioner Barker asked whether the applicant could use that space for on-street parking now, since <br />the right-turn lane will not be needed until build-out, with the understanding that it will be taken away. <br />Mr. Iserson stated that he would ask Bill van Gelder if that would be acceptable. Mr. Hirst noted that he <br />discussed that same suggestion with Mr. van Gelder, who said that no on-street parking will be allowed. <br />John J. Hounslow, Chairman of the Board, 156 Diablo Road, Danville, stated that the bank is happy to <br />be in Pleasanton. He noted that his main concern upon looking at the site was the appeazance of the <br />back of the building and parking lot. He stated that the bank tried to buy the property behind the parking <br />lot in order to increase the lot, but the owners were not interested in selling. Therefore, they came up <br />with the fence plan. In addition, he stated he was shocked to hear for the first time tonight that a <br />three-foot fence was proposed. He also commented that the applicant currently has another property on <br />escrow that may be used for additional parking. However, at some point in the Future, they will continue <br />to try to get the property behind the bank for additional parking and will continue to search for other <br />Planning Commission Page 23 April 8, 1998 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.