CCMIN091801 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Swirl said the primary difference would have been application of the Building Codes. At the time it started the process, we didn't have the historic building codes. To convert the existing building to an office use would have required that the building be modified in extensive ways with respect to the Building and Fire Codes (handicapped access, one-hour fire walls, etc.). That would have made the remodel more difficult to do. Now, with the historic building code, the Building Official has some flexibility to work with property owners to come up with reasonable life safety compromises. That is what staffis working on now to establish reasonable guidelines. Ms. Ayala asked if staff was generally treating everyone the same? Mr. Swift said the Codes change and depending on when an application starts the process, determines what Code is applied. The Zoning Ordinance has not changed in almost fifteen years, so in that respect everyone is treated the same with respect to expansions, when parking is required, when in-lieu parking fees are required, etc. This is unusual because normally an in-lieu parking fee is assessed with an application for a new project. The Coffee Roast Express is a good example. Additional on-site parking was needed, and before the project is approved, a decision is made whether to require all the parking on-site, part of the parking on- site, or the payment of in-lieu fees and whether they are paid now or later. In this instance, the City did not have the ability to do that because of the circumstances. This is the first building in his experience that started with a remodel project that ended up tom down to the ground. Since then, there have been several others that have come close. This is a new circumstance which raises questions of how to apply the Zoning Ordinance and the various Codes. If you characterize this in such a way that the building was rebuilt the same as it was before and should therefore be a remodel, then Council can make that finding and staffwill use that information when considering the new downtown specific plan. On the other hand, a different interpretation could be made. Ms. Ayala did not like deciding things like this on a case-by-case basis. Once a decision is made on this project, it should be carried through to other downtown properties. Can staff recommend the policies that should be established, or does that have to wait for the completion of the downtown specific plan? Ms. McKeehan said until the rules are changed, staff tries to be as flexible as it can with the understanding that changes will be forthcoming. Mr. Swift said if there is another project with the same circumstances as this, then it would be treated in the same way Council directs in this instance. There are not enough hard and fast rules in the Zoning Code, which is why staffgave Council four different options in this case. Ms. Dennis clarified that the passage of the historic preservation ordinance assisted development of commercial uses in this area, by not having such stringent requirements as used to be applied for the remodel ora building. Mr. Swift agreed. However, there will still be an issue as to whether you can apply the historic preservation ordinance to a building that is totally demolished and rebuilt from scratch. Pleasanton City Council 20 09/18/01 Minutes