CCMIN031180 - Laserfiche WebLink

On the basis of an Initial. Study of the potential environmental impacts of the p~oJect~ the Directorof Plannin~ and Community Development has determined that ~he proposed project would not have ~ny potentialsignificant adverse effects on the environment and that an environmental impact report need not be prepared. This Initial StUdy is available for review at the Planning Division~ 200 Bern~.l Avenue~ Pleasanton. Comments on this d~cisionmay be directed to either the Plannin~ st~ff prior to the above meeting date, or di~Qc.tly to the City Council at the above noticed meeting (Continued Open from 2-11-80 and 2-26-80) Mr. Harris presented his report dated February 5, 1980, regarding this matter. Mayor Brandes declared the public hearing open on the appeal and the negative declaration. Mr. Jack Bras, Architect representing the appellant, stated he had requested this item be continued from February 11, 1980, and February 26, 1980, in an attempt to work out a solution to the ingress and egress problem hy securing an easement for this purpose. Mr. Bras stated his client had contacted three adjacent property owners in an effort to secure such an easement and had been turned downby all three property owners. He presented letters confirming this fact from Mr. Baker, Pleasanton Foods, and Marinda Development. Mr. Bras presented drawings showing site plan revealing existing property and the proposed new building, as well as proposed ingress and egress to the development. Mr. Bras stated that he felt this development met the Code relative to parking. He stated that 60% of the building would be occupied by Family Cleaners. Mr. Bras advised that adjacent property owners use Pleasanton Foods parking lot, and that they pay Pleasanton Foods for this parking privilege, and that the same arrangement will be made by tenants and employees of the proposed new building. Mr. Bras stated the proposed development is a good project and will benefit the downtown area. He advised it willL'create 11 new parking spaces to be used by tenants and employees, will create a unique courtyard business and add charm to the downtown, and will create new capital expenditure. He stated the objections by Design Review Board and City staff are associated with ingress and egress to the project and that he had not been able to overcome this problem. Mr. Bras suggested the following measures could be taken to alleviate possible problems relative to this matter: (1) install "No Public Parking" signs; (2) clean up the driveway by the removal of such meters as could be eliminated; (3) put up decor and give the courtyard a name; (4) modify parking to Pleasanton Foods property if the situation changes; (5) Join a parking assessment district if such assessment district were ever formed; and (6) reduce the size of the building to 1,570 sq. ft., as requested by staff. Mr. Bras con- cluded by stating he felt this proposal was good and would benefit the downtown area and that the benefits outweighed the disadvantages, and the application does meet City Codes. Councilmember Kephart asked staff if the signal at St. John andMain Streets could be moved to St. Mary Street and would it be cost effective. Mr. Campbell advised the signalization on Main Street was phased properly at this time as much as is possible, that installation of each signal cost approximately $60,000, and to move the signal from St. John Street to St. Mary Street would cost approximately $40,000-$50,000, saving only $10,000-$20,000. Councilmember Kephart expressed con- cern about increased traffic congestion at St. Mary and Main Streets if this pro- Ject is allowed to be constructed. ".. Mayor Brandes asked about emergency ingress and egress to this proposed develop- ment. Mr. Bras explained that emergency equipment could use the existing drive, Pleasanton Foods property, behind the Baker Building by removing a 6 ft. wood fence, and behind the Marinda property.