CCMIN080195 - Laserfiche WebLink

fact that is written into the storage contracts. With fingerprinting of storage users, video taping of the facility and 24 hour security, it doesn't leave much chance of that happening. There being no further testimony, Mayor Tarver declared the public hearing closed. Ms. Dennis stated she spoke with the Knuppes and she was surprised that the project did allow the neighborhood to avoid some of the impacts, like traffic. She felt that as a storage facility with a unique design, it does not have more impacts that another type of commercial use might have. The building, however, would be an oddity, since it would never be able to be used for any other use but storage. She felt that Pleasanton has other areas where this facility could be located without all the design troubles that this particular site brings with it. Ms. Michelotti stated that she met with the Knuppes and thought the architectural designs were amazing. However, at the Planning Commission meeting, the concerns about the setbacks along Stoneridge and Foothill and the footprint of the building (everything is internal) were intense issues. The Knuppes would be welcomed to the community but stated her doubts that this site is the best place for a storage facility. The Moraga site is in a much different location than the proposed site. The turnoff at Foothill is the entrance to the mall as well as to the residential part of the community. This was not the correct site and there were better sites in Pleasanton for people who have safety issues with storage sites. She would not be able to support the application. Mr. Pico stated that the community was well organized in their writing campaign against the Knuppe appeal. There is, however, an uncertainty to the site, if this appeal is not approved. He felt the community would rather live with the uncertainty than have the 5A Rent-A-Space. He couldn't look past the community voice, the staff recommendation, the Planning Commission recommendation and the solid unified opposition of the neighbors. He felt there wasn't enough positive impact to the City to overturn those concems and those issues. There may be some options available including a possible land swap and he was willing to work with the Knuppes to find something more in line with a win/win scenario. There is a demand for the storage space, and the Knuppes would be welcomed to the community, but this potential site could be a natural extension to the park. He intends to support the neighborhood and will be unable to support the appeal. Ms. Mohr stated that in 1980 that area was zoned commercial, but was rezoned residential for the Gold Creek development and a senior hotel. The commercial zoning that exists today on the property, with an approved senior hotel on it, goes back to the time of the City's processes that had a residential allocation program (RAP). This senior hotel was going to have commercial type uses on the ground floor (barber shop, beauty shop, gift shop, etc.). When the residential and commercial zoning was looked at, the residential units would have to be counted in the RAP program, which at that time was tight, and the Council had to turn down projects. By zoning the property commercial, it kept it out of the RAP process, which is a very different issue than what the appeal is for today. If it had not been for the Residential Allocation Program, it would have been zoned residential at that time. She thought Mr. Loving was a very 08/01/95 -9-