CCMIN091801 - Laserfiche WebLink

_ It was moved by Mr. Campbell to approve Option 2 of the staff report, to classify this as a remodel and have the W/nters pay for three spaces. Ms. Ayala was not comfortable with that because of the in-lieu fees. Mr. Roush indicated Option 2 is not a compromise, per se. If you conclude that this is a remodel, then staffis saying that the Winters would be required to provide six spaces. They can provide three on-site therefore they should pay for three in-lieu spaces. The applicants' proposal is Option 3, which states they would pay for two in-lieu spaces on the basis that eight spaces were required, three are on site, they are asking for a waiver of three based on public use and therefore they would pay for two. It seems if you conclude this is a remodel, you could choose Options 2 or 3. Mr. Campbell withdrew his first motion. It was moved by Mr. Campbell, seconded by Ms. Michelotti, to approve Option 3, classify this as a remodel and have the Winters pay for two in-lieu spaces, the on-site spaces be for public parking and there should be some signage. Ms. Ayala did not think anyone would go behind the building for public parking, so we are pretending that we are doing something. Ms. Michelotti disagreed. She said the Century 21 business was an example where parking is used. She agreed signage would be necessary. A substitute motion was made by Ms. Dennis, seconded by Ms. Ayala, to approve the staff recommendation (Option 1) requiring payment of five in lieu spaces. She believed that if the Winters work with their neighbors to provide public parking for all the properties behind those buildings, they will only have to pay for two spaces and will he refunded $24,000. That will be a better usage to serve all those buildings. She thought that was a fair compromise. Although the house looks the same and they did do a beautiful job of restoring it, they doubled the usable space of the house. In fairness to the neighborhood, it is not being used as a residence and she did not think the parking spaces provided really will serve the amount of space they have. She did not think the determination of whether it was new construction or a remodel was the central issue. It is the use proposed and the impact of the vehicles to the business and the employees that create the problem. She acknowledged that parking downtown is an emerging issue that will have to be addressed. The more commercial use that is added, the more of an issue parking will become. She felt the best resolution was to have a joint use parking lot shared as public parking. That way there is a minimum financial impact on the Winters and the maximum of flexibility for all those properties to be either commercial or residential. Ms. Michelotti did not support that. The Winters did not start the project as a total reconstruction. She felt it was a remodel. She agreed the Winters should work with their neighbors for a joint use parking lot. Pleasanton City Council 22 09/18/01 Minutes