PC 02/12/97 - Laserfiche WebLink

Andrea Bortner, 4420 First Street, is concerned about the loss of property values. She asked Dr. Bleecker to address the maximum number if women who will utilize this service since he says there is a great demand for this type of service. To staff, she asked what recourse the neighborhood will have if the conditions of approval are violated. Staff advised Ms. Bortner that when the Zoning Administer is advised of a noncompliance situation, the conditional use permit holder is advised to bring himself into compliance. If that is not done, it would be referred back to the Planning Commission to apply new conditions or a possible revocation of the use permit. Ms. Bortner inquired what is the burden of proof they must provide to the City of violations. Chair Barker stated the neighborhood would have to "police" their neighborhood. Cathy Graham, 4443 Second Street, stated she is surprised the application has come this far considering the amount of neighborhood opposition. She commented that teenagers do grow up and move away, the birthing center won't. Livermore residents can't say that this birthing center is in their neighborhood. What would it take to get staff to reverse their recommendation? She asked the staff to do the right thing for their neighborhood. Nancy Bankhead, 5781 Fallen Road, owns the property at 218 Abbey Street. She has invested considerable money to remodel this home and was only able to remodel because of the property's value. She spoke about a heritage home being used for commercial purposes, but the City doesn't allow people to remove heritage trees. Ms. Bankhead stated that Heidi Kline had told the neighborhood meeting that this type of variance could be granted anywhere in the City, however, the applicant states it can only be granted in this neighborhood. She is concerned about parking, that cooking is allowed in the center, that catering trucks are allowed to deliver, and there only being a three foot setback from the adjacent property. Gerard Rawson, 4410 Second Street, read a letter written by his wife stating that they are against the birthing center application and inquired what would prevent other businesses such as a CPA, dog groomer or tattoo artist to establish their business on Second Street. A loophole in a zoning ordinance is at issue. Joan Davila, 4625 Third Street, stated that she has seen First Street and Spring Street go commercial. Second Street is the last of old Pleasanton, and it is unfair to see it change. Emergencies do happen in childbirth where ambulances are needed. Please leave our neighborhood as it is; we don't need this in our neighborhood. Rebuttal from Dr. Bleecker: He is offering full value for this property which has been on the market for six months. He does not feel this facility will depress the property values in the area. Dr. Bleecker is still waiting for Mr. Dunkley to contact him with alternate sites. He believes the concept of his project enhances the richness of the community rather than detracting from it. He is flabbergasted at the amount of opposition to his proposal. ~ Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 .'ebruary 12, 1997