CCMIN091801 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Bielski indicated her mother owns a business downtown and referred to discussion about a parking lot next to a pizza shop. Until there is more clarification of the rules, she thought the 216 Spring Street issues should be put on hold. As a resident, she has a lot of difficulty parking on Spring Street and related various incidents. Rosemarie Pease, 1482 Ridgewood Road, believed the house was finalized as a business property and the Winters have made a fair offer that should be accepted. She said she has been involved in remodeling a business on St. Mary Street and in the construction of two brand new office buildings on Black Avenue. She agreed there are problems with the way City staff deals with small developers and she would not undertake a remodel today. Michael Maslana, 228 Spring Street, lives next door to 216 Spring Street. He said he tried to help the Winters with their parking situation. The Code Enforcement officer inquired if he had a business in his home. He said he has no sign on his building and has paid all required fees. Now he has problems with the City and he was just trying to help his neighbor with a parking agreement. He did not think the Winters should have to pay anything and this sets a bad precedent. He referred to a prior dispute about the actual zoning of the property and affirmed that it is residential-commercial. He felt more than fifty percent of the residences on Spring Street are used for commercial purposes. He believed that since the structure was approved as a residential remodel, if the Winters had lived in it for one day, it could have been converted to commercial with no in lieu fees at all. Mr. MacDonald explained that there is a License Agreement between the Winters and Mr. Maslana to provide the 24 foot backup space required by the City. That whole area has cooperated for the last forty years. He said this easement was necessary because of the City. The week after it was signed, the Code Enforcement Officer came to visit Mr. Maslana. Mr. MacDonald talked to Jerry Iserson of the Planning Department, who assured him that he did not send the Code Enforcement Officer. Kathleen Butler, 1545 Trimingham Drive, supported the Winters. She is the tenant in 216 Spring Street and she wants to keep this property as a commercial use. She has been in business in Pleasanton in different locations for fifteen years. She did not believe the City was sending a positive message for businesses. Mr. Campbell asked what her business was and whether she had customers who came to her office. Ms. Butler said it is an advertising and public relations company that works with a lot of new home developers. She does not have customers come to her office because it is too small. She has two employees beside herself in the office. They usually park on Railroad Avenue. Ms. McKeehan indicated that the Code Enforcement Officer does not go out unless there is a complaint received. What often happens is a question is raised of one business, who then asks about other businesses. Soon there is a series of complaints down the street. Staffdoes not have the time nor the interest in sending Code Enforcement out looking for violations. Pleasanton City Council 16 09/18/01 Minutes