PC 083116 - Laserfiche WebLink

Weinstein: So what we're saying is that we think it's okay in the absence of any LI districts in town; we think it's okay to delete them from our zoning ordinance because light industrial uses are allowed in other districts, right? We don't need that LI district anymore to accommodate light industrial uses because light industrial uses can be accommodated elsewhere, so that's the concept here. If we think there's a need for LI districts, we'll need to rezone existing districts to that district so that would, in itself, require a rezoning, I just want to point that out. Commissioner Brown: I was confused at first, but I'm okay with what you did personally. Commissioner Allen: Me too. Chair Ritter: Okay, any other comments on the categories? Commissioner Balch: I do like it. Commissioner Brown: I don't know where it fits in these questions but the .... on page 8 when you have, the planning division occasionally receives requests from prospective owners opening a business type which is not specifically identified in the zoning code as a permitted or conditionally permitted use, you're essentially suggesting that the control moves away from the Planning Commission and goes to the Zoning Administrator unless they feel it's necessary to bump up. I'm not sure if I'm particularly comfortable with that. Beaudin: We're looking at people who own property in the room, so when you come in with a business what happens right now, and I feel comfortable saying this publicly because I've only been here for a year, for years what's happened is the Community Development Director or Zoning Administrator, someone at the City has been deciding... if somebody comes in and says I want to put in a laser tag facility, that's substantially similar to an indoor community recreation use or an indoor public recreation use and those uses have gone forward without coming to a broader public hearing with a staff report explaining the rationale for that. I mean, this is the first time that I've seen a City have it come to a public hearing to make those kinds of determinations in the code and just practically it hasn't happened that way in a very long time. And so what we're trying to do here is just daylight the whole thing. These decisions get made all the time. People come in and try to figure out whether their business works or not in Pleasanton and then somebody makes the call that it's substantially similar or not to an existing use. And in the case of the categories, you couldn't leave everything as vague as: let us take it to the Planning Commission to make sure it fits into one of these broad categories. It just wouldn't work for us. It's just like too much glue in a process that's already cumbersome. Commissioner Balch: Having been a person who just did a PUD Minor Modification for the business park that I mentioned in town in 2014, you know, it amazes me the number of uses we have explicitly and painstakingly detailed out that just are burdensome to even find out if you can facilitate anything. And just a few nuances in your use versus that can cause such delay for nothing. So I know this is going on and I personally think it's got to make the process work, and I think the nuances .... the business park that I'm talking about is 40 years old or so, or getting close to it, and it has smelting on it. It has PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 31, 2016 Page 48 of 58