13 - Laserfiche WebLink

was entitled "Provisions and CUPS for Child Safety, Tri-Valley After-school Sports and Martial Arts Programs, Tutoring Programs, Montessori Schools, etc.," and it was originally sent on March 8 to the City Council, some City staff members and some persons in Dublin. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENEll. Peter MacDonald, Pleasanton Downtown Association, noted that Christine Salidivar asked him to speak in support of the change in ordinance. He supported the idea of simplifying the ordinance, allowing people to register without needing to go through a six-month discretionary use process that often killed small businesses. He did not agree with the change in one word that greatly increased the control of government over a small existing business. I Ie recalled the background ol~ Mrs. Berg's case and noted that the 600-square-foot space she used did not generate a large paii<ing problem. He believed the landlord could have handled it if needed. I Ie believed the requirement for the one-hour fire wall for that small space was excessive and added that the then City Manager, Deborah McKeehan, did not believe it reflected common sense. I Ie believed that the objective standards of this ordinance that did not require discretionary requirements was a step in the right direction. He could see a concern about a dance studio, but a tutoring business in an office building did not need that Kind of fire insulation. He added that objective standards obviated the need for government micromanagement. He noted that when a small issue got to the political level, noticing the neighbors often created tights between neighbors. He supported this simplitlcation which would not require a business to pay rent for six months before commencing business. Michael O'Callaghan, 125 West Neal Street, Pleasanton Downtown Association, Economic Vitality Committee, Design Review Committee, Streamlining Development Task Porce, spoke in support of this item. He noted that the Commission was an advisory commission appointed by the City Council and was not a legislative committee. I [e noted that the I3rown Act was meant to prevent a quorum of legislative members from meeting and privately discussing matters that would be heard in public hearings. IIc strongly disagreed with the Commissions direction as well as the direction taken by staff to instruct any public or private citizens to direct their comments to stafl~ before they may be inserted in a package. He believed the Commissioners had the right to solicit on a one-on-one discussion any matter coming before the Commission in advance. He believed City government was already over-regulated and that as long as staff was "beat about the head and shoulders° by a Council, neighborhood politics governed and staff would be operating on a zero-risk mentality, which caused overregulation out of fear. With respect to this particular topic, he supported the itcu~ and did not believe that Item G on the application for Application for Zoning Approval form should be there. He believed that measuring a "sound level over a period of time" was an ambiguous statement in terms of measurements. He believed the current occupancy standards for this hind of business was broad and overregulated. Ile agreed with Mr. h9acDonald's comments. PLANNING COMMISSION MWUTI;S March l~}, 2007 Page 4 of 7