17 - Laserfiche WebLink

RECEIVED January 14, 2021 1-14-2021 Planning Commission P21-0033 City of Pleasanton 200 Old Bernal Avenue CITY OF PLEASANTON PO Box 520 PLANNING DIVISION Pleasanton, CA 94566 EXHIBIT B Subject: Appeal of Staff Denial(550 Main Street) Case P20-1062 Honorable Chair and Members of the Commission, This letter,and the appeal form filed with Planning, is to serve as my appeal of the Director of Community Development's determination to deny a requested exception to the Active Ground Floor Overlay requirements for my business at 550 Main Street. Background This case is a result of covid,which caused the prior tenant of 550 Main Street, a yoga studio,to close and terminate its lease for the space I leased. At that time, my landlord put the space and an adjacent space up for lease, and there was no interest generally, especially from any possible retailers. Retail and other active businesses were closing throughout Main Street by government order and from lack of demand, because no one wanted to open a retail store in the covid business environment. This Business When I expressed interest in leasing the space for my real estate office, my landlord was happy to have a substantial business to keep the building from going vacant indefinitely,as are other buildings in downtown Pleasanton. Neither I nor the landlord were aware that real estate offices on Main Street had been recently restricted by the City. I spent$30,000 improving the interior of the lease space and fitting it to my intended use. Upon opening,we were told about the new ordinance prohibiting our use. The City Staff investigated a possible exception because the space was otherwise not leasable. But without a six-month vacancy period, Planning Staff feels it has no discretion to waive the six month vacancy period required for an exception to be granted. Technically,the space was vacant for six months, but City Staff measures vacancy period by the date the lease was signed, rather than when opened for business. During covid a more lenient interpretation would be appropriate to prevent a tsunami of Main Street vacancies as a result of that policy. I am told the Planning Commission,as a policy making body,has discretion to interpret the six-month vacancy period more leniently. That said, Planning Staff pointed out that if the front 25%of the building facing Main Street is used for retail,then the City has no discretion but to allow that use. Although we had preliminary discussion about possible retail uses co-habiting the space with the real estate business, at the time the City Staff 1