CCMIN120198 - Laserfiche WebLink

find it offensive. He supported the regulation or permitting process to further control these businesses and protect the community. Ms. Michelotti felt this type of business was not appropriate for the downtown area or the Stoneridge Mall area. She would like to know where these businesses could locate currently. She reminded people that this type of business has always been allowed in Pleasanton. She thanked the audience for their respect towards the applicant. This is a family oriented community that only wants to keep it that way. She would like to discuss this further to see where else these businesses could be located. She mentioned that the restriction that no one under the age of eighteen can enter a business is a condition usually put on through a conditional use permit process. She needed to know how the conditions would change if this use was permitted under IP zoning or limited. Ms. Ayala asked if there would be any legal challenges if the ordinance were left as it currently is. Mr. Pico felt no matter what decision is made the ordinance would be subject to legal challenge if somebody wanted to pursue that avenue. He felt the ordinance with its existing conditional use permit requirements in industrial areas provided ample opportunities for this type of business to be in the community and also allowed the City to regulate or put conditions on the business. He did not want to create an all encompassing massive ordinance when them has never been any problems. Ms. Dennis had a concern that if the City were challenged and the ordinance was found wanting, would that leave the City without an ordinance. Would the City be able to redraft and reintroduce another ordinance? Mr. Roush said there could be a challenge to the ordinance on its face and as it applies. If the ordinance were found to be invalid, the City could appeal and staff would bring back to Council revisions to the ordinance. Council need not be overly concerned with a business trying to locate within that window. He said there would be an opportunity to try and fix the ordinance. Mayor Tarver liked the current ordinance. Mr. Roush said when the City told the applicant that he could not locate where he wanted to, the City received a letter from the applicant's attorney suggesting that the ordinance might not be consistent with First Amendment rights. The issue has been studied and discussed and is now up to Council to decide. Ms. Ayala said the suggestion is to keep the exiting zoning but include a permitting process. Would it be better not to do anything? Pleasanton City Council 27 12/01/98 Minutes