My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 011520
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2020
>
PC 011520
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/12/2020 4:16:01 PM
Creation date
3/12/2020 4:15:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
1/15/2020
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
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
Ms. Seto stated she spoke to staff from the City of Livermore, but their changes had only been <br /> in effect for a short period, specifically since January 2020; she referenced the process of legal <br /> non-conforming uses. <br /> Commissioner Balch questioned the restrictions on a legal, non-conforming gas station. <br /> Ms. Seto explained that tobacco products could not be sold within the 1000-foot buffer. <br /> Commissioner Allen inquired as to what would happen if an existing business was sold to <br /> another property owner. <br /> Ms. Seto explained that most uses ran with the land under a conditional use permit. She stated <br /> a remodel or expansion would not allow expansion of legal, non-conforming uses. <br /> Commissioner Balch referenced the recent Shell/7-Eleven project on Hopyard Road and <br /> whether that would be an exception. <br /> Community Development Director Ellen Clark responded that project was modifying its use to <br /> include a combined gas station and convenience store, therefore, a restriction on tobacco <br /> could be imposed. <br /> Commissioner Allen inquired about "going dark" and the issue surrounding advertising and the <br /> presence of the product. She questioned enforcement and whether tobacco should be licensed <br /> by the City. <br /> Ms. Seto responded that tobacco retailer licensing (TRL) was an option in many of the cities <br /> within Alameda County. She summarized the internal discussions and determined there was <br /> not capacity to license and monitor those uses. She discussed stings by the Police Department <br /> and the Code Enforcement process for "going dark." <br /> Commissioner Allen inquired about the level of change that could be expected if the City <br /> grandfathered existing retailers. She asked how long the existing, affected businesses had <br /> been in business as a tobacco retailer. She requested historical data surrounding current <br /> tobacco retailers. <br /> Ms. Seto responded that gathering historical data would be a timely project for staff but that <br /> could be undertaken. <br /> Ms. Clark referenced the types of businesses currently selling tobacco-related products and <br /> indicated that change could be slow. <br /> Chair Ritter inquired about enforcement, fines issued and whether there was a three-strikes <br /> law. <br /> Ms. Seto stated offenders were reported to the State, which might jeopardize their license. <br /> Commissioner Balch inquired about the City of Pleasanton Police Department's enforcement <br /> when conducting a sting operation and the rate of passage. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 11 January 15, 2020 <br /> Commissioner O'Connor inquired about grandfathering regarding the buffer options and asked <br /> what other cities were doing. He also inquired about the expected change and the impact for <br /> the future. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 11 January 15, 2020 <br />