My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2012 10 11
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2012 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2012 10 11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:20 AM
Creation date
1/31/2013 8:53:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2012 10 11
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />October 11, 2012 <br />Page 8 of 11 <br /> <br />Commission Questions of Staff <br />Tengler asked about the Guaranteed Ride Home Program. <br />Robinson stated this is a program where Pearl Izumi would provide transportation to <br />any employee who might be stranded at work. <br />Tengler asked what the significant difference is between a large detention pond and <br />several smaller ponds. <br />Robinson stated smaller ponds allow for more infiltration and dispersion. <br />Tengler asked if there was a berm provided between this development and the <br />adjacent Aquarius Open Space, especially to lessen the impact of lighting. <br />Robinson stated there was a berm. <br />Moline asked how trail connections happen from CTC to Lafayette. <br />Robinson stated there is a connection proposed on the east side of the property. <br />Pritchard asked how the lighting plan relates to the lighting plan found on Lockheed. <br />Robinson stated he was not sure without further research. <br />Brauneis stated the lighting was handled well to the west and south but what about <br />the east. <br />Robinson stated the lot to the east is empty. <br />Applicant Presentation <br />Brauneis moved and Tengler seconded to enter into public record the materials <br />board provided by the applicant. Motion passed by voice vote. <br />Kimble Hobbs, applicant’s architect, gave a background of his firm and then <br />discussed the architectural features of the building. He then addressed the following: <br /> <br /> He discussed the background of the lighting plan to address the lighting <br />concerns previously addressed by Planning Commission. <br /> <br /> Native grasses are being proposed. <br />Commission Questions of Applicant <br />Brauneis asked the applicant to go into more detail on the architectural features. <br />Hobbs spoke directly to the materials board which was handed out earlier to the <br />commission. He then discussed the following: <br /> <br /> How water from the roof is taken to the detention ponds, which have a sand <br />filtering process. <br /> <br /> The building is designed to allow for day light harvesting so each office can <br />have as much natural light as possible. <br /> <br /> The exterior lighting is low impact and sustainable for the development. <br /> <br /> They will be using low flow water features and urinals. <br />Brauneis asked about the “pedals of the living building challenge”. <br />Hobbs stated they balanced the design techniques of the building with the budget <br />they were given. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.