CCMIN120198 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Ayala said the developer has agreed to all of the conditions. Ms. Michelotti was willing to include in her motion the proposal allowing one year for the business to operate. Ms. Dennis had concerns with the industrial use and any responsibility that the City has regarding the site from the point of view of any hazards that are identified and if the City cannot undertake the monitoring of that site. Mr. Swift said once the property is annexed to the City that existing use falls under the CUPA jurisdiction as well as the City's building codes. Representatives of the Fire Department and Building Department believe that the use needs significant modification and major dollars spent in order to meet the City's code requirements. That is why staff recommended the use cease upon annexation. If the property is annexed to the City and the industrial use remains in operation the City will ensure that it meets the building and hazardous material code requirements, which would be a great expense to the property owner. Ms. Michelotti understood that if Council approved the extension of time the property would be subject to the restrictions the City would enforce. Ms. Acosta said yes, but the approval would put the City in a difficult position. Staff appreciated the property owner wanting to continue its business but the City needs to decide when an old use ends and a new use begins. Ms. Dennis regretted not being able to accommodate the property owner but she could not support the extension of time. Ms. Michelotti withdrew that part of her motion. A substitute motion was made by Mr. Pico, seconded by Mayor Tarver, adding to Ms. Michelotti's motion that the amenity package be changed from $1 million to $2.5 million. Ms. Ayala asked staff to explain how staff came up with the $1 million for amenities. Mr. Swift said the applicant proposed $800,000. The Planning Commission increased the amount to $1 million. The applicant subsequently agreed to the increase prior to the November 3 public hearing. Staff does not do economic feasibility studies because there are too many issues that staff does not have access to. Staff took the $1 million and related it the number'of units, coming up with the $23,000 per unit. Staff took this number and compared it to other approved projects and found the number to be in the economically feasible range for this project. Pleasanton City Council 14 12/01/98 Minutes