PC 02/24/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Edward Myers, 4375 Canary Drive, Pleasanton, stated that he is 0 ner of a unit in the complex; however, he rents it out. He expressed opposition to the application and felt that a precedent for non-exempt home occupations would be set for the c mplex. He felt that prospective buyers and renters might be discouraged from buying 0 renting if they know of a custom of being allowed to run a home occupation. In addition, e expressed concern as to who would monitor the number of clients who would come to th Mullen residence. He stated that other unit owners have expressed concern to him about aving a massage occupation in the complex. He was also concerned that parking co ld be a problem. ium. In response to f the Board of Directors Commissioner Michelotti requested that Mr. Pittman return to the her question, Mr. Pittman replied that all the present five members do live in the complex. Ms. Mullen returned to the podium. In response to a comment by r. Pittman, Ms. Mullen said she did not know and was personally not informed as to when e Board agenda would include a discussion of the matter being discussed. She further res nded to Mr. Myers' concern about inadequate parking, noting that she felt there was pIe ty of parking available. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner McGuirk stated that he sees a specific difference bet een "customer-facing" and "noncustomer-facing" home businesses. He did not think he wa in favor of the possibility of numerous customer-facing businesses starting up in a c osely-knit complex such as this one. He stated that he is opposed to having a non-exempt oc upation in the complex. Commissioner Wright stated that he is opposed to the application m nly because of it being a traffic-generating business. He felt it would be different if it were in a single family home, and if the applicant were the owner of the property, not a renter. Chairman Hovingh asked Mr. Wright if he would feel differently ab ut the application if the applicant were wanting to teach piano. Commissioner Wright stated hat he would feel the same, noting that the problem is mainly due to sharing close quarters with adjacent neighbors. He would definitely feel the same even if the applicant w re teaching piano. Commissioner Michelotti stated that she is not so concerned about th location and felt that the parking was plentiful. However, she is concerned that if one non exempt occupation is allowed that it could eventually lead to others and subsequently, prob ems with parking. She does not want to discourage businesses; however, she felt a business n this complex would not work. Discussion ensued as to how other applications for non-exempt occup tions in the complex might be treated. Mr. Swift reminded the Commission that each appl cation would be considered on a case-by-case basis. Planning Commission Minutes February 24, 1993 Page 4 ,I