PC 07/29/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

4. REVISIONS AND OMISSIONS TO THE AGENDA - There were none. 5. MATTERS CONTINUED FOR DECISION There were none. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. PUD-98-O5, Pacific Union Ventures. Inc. Application for a Planned Unit Development rezoning and development plan approval for the construction of a 26,240-square foot office/retail building located at 325 Ray Street. Zoning for the property is R-1-6,500 (Single Family Residential, 6,500 square-foot lot minimum size) District, Downtown Revitalization District, Core Area Overlay District. Also consider the Negative Declaration prepared for the project. Jerry Iserson, Principal Planner, referenced a staff report dated July 29, 1998 and highlighted key areas including the Downtown Specific Plan Land Use Conformity, site plan and density, traffic circulation, pazking, noise, landscaping ,and lighting. Further, he noted that the hours of operation of businesses, as conditioned by staff, will be Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. _ Mr. Iserson noted the concems of the neighbors including opposition to commercial development on the property, increased traffic on Ray Street, impacts of retail uses, late-night businesses, deliveries ,pazking lot noise, lighting and screening concerns, and design of building. Further, he noted that staff believes that aPUD-Central Commercial Zoning District would be the most appropriate zoning for this lot and that uses and performance standazds for tenants are appropriate. Further, that staff finds the site plan to be functional, architectural style is appropriate for Downtown, the building will be an attractive addition to Ray street, and that approval of this project would not have any significant adverse effects on the environment. PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Matt Tunney, Pacific Union Ventures, provided a presentation of the proposed development and stated that the goal of the project is to provide a project that is an amenity to the City of Pleasanton. He noted that the staff report was comprehensive and highlighted azeas of differences between staff and the applicant including proposing 7,000 squaze feet of retail use versus 3,500, and the applicant pursuing parking in-lieu credits or dedication of some of the pazking spaces to public use to increase mazketability. Further, he noted a desire for increased hours of operation from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., and interest in financial institution use. Discussion ensued relating to the 7,000-8,000 squaze feet occupation of the building, the effects on parking due to recent recommendation to the City Council for requested changes in financial institution parking ratio, and the dedication of pazking spaces for public use to gain allocation bonus for retail space. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 2 July 29, 1998