My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
030717
>
12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/1/2017 3:00:33 PM
Creation date
3/1/2017 9:51:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/7/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
179
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).
View images
View plain text
residential developers develop residential, and neither is very good at the other; but <br /> mixed-use developers develop mixed-use projects and understand how to build them, <br /> design them, market them, and rent/lease them out. He added that a retail specialist <br /> would answer a retail question differently than a mixed-use development specialist <br /> would. <br /> Mr. Williams indicated that these retail spaces are set up around mixed-use <br /> developments, and the criteria used are about that type of development. He added that <br /> retail can fit in either types of buildings, but whether 40 feet is a reasonable depth is <br /> pushing the envelope of being right on the edge of being too shallow. He indicated that <br /> this is a reasonable compromise, but he believes 60 feet is what almost every retailer <br /> will say is the best retail depth. <br /> Chair Narum inquired how wide a building with a 60 foot depth would be. <br /> Mr. Williams replied that he would expect 30 feet wide by 60 feet, or 60 feet by 60 feet, <br /> which would be a reasonable depth and width at 3, 600 square feet or almost all of the <br /> 5,000 square feet. <br /> Chair Narum stated that 3,600 square feet would be for only one corner, but the <br /> Commission specified two corners. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor noted that the Commission is not mandating two corners but <br /> only one or the other. He noted that if one corner is 60 feet by 60 feet, the space left is <br /> would be very narrow for another 60 feet. <br /> Commissioner Pentin stated that the second corner would not be 60 feet. <br /> Mr. Williams indicated that this is not a critical issue and that when the applicants get <br /> through the eventual design, they will find that if they work on the retail space thinking <br /> about it for retail, they will end up coming up with a solution that works. He noted that <br /> the worst thing that can happen is to have someone come in and design a project that <br /> does not care about the retail space, and they will not include what is necessary to <br /> ensure a café or restaurant, they will not put in all the shafts for all the utilities, and they <br /> will not provide the right acoustics needed for building out tenant spaces appropriately. <br /> He noted that this is not something included in the design guidelines, but these are <br /> needed to get a development that is going to be successful for retail. <br /> Mr. Williams stated that the reason most retails are not successful in a mixed-use <br /> development is because those who built it wanted a residential development rather than <br /> a mixed-use development, and it does not work because it was not designed or <br /> marketed appropriately. He indicated that Mr. Fleissig has done hundreds of thousands <br /> of feet of retail and mixed-use developments, and he would not put in a unit that was <br /> that narrow if the City is trying to get a successful retail space. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, January 26, 2011 Page 37 of 40 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.