CCMIN040202 - Laserfiche WebLink

considering the downtown location, a bonus feature I would like to retain. In the next year I look forward to renovating my building and adding to the quality appearance of the downtown area. However, I have to say that after talking with all of my neighbors I am somewhat apprehensive about the project." Ms. Winters said Mr. Mislana owns 228 Spring Street and writes, "In the likely event I am not able to attend tonight's City Council meeting, please accept this email and forward to any and all interested responsible parties, as necessary. It is my position that unless and until the City of Pleasanton either through a successful negotiated acquisition or completion of an eminent domain proceeding has legal title to our property situated at 228 Spring Street, any and all correspondence, discussions, negotiations, agreements, etc. with any of my neighbors on Spring Street to grant any shared access to or public right of way for parking privileges are to be null and void with respect to our property. It has been our practice and we will continue notifying via written warning any unauthorized persons parking a vehicle on our property. The second violation will result in the offending vehicle being towed." Ms. Winters said they have had a recorded easement between 216 and 228 Spring Street for over seven years. It has been an access easement to the rear yard as well as a backup easement for each property to be able to get out the driveway. Nowhere and at no time has there been a reciprocal easement for parking purposes. It is pretty clear there will never be any voluntarily parking reciprocation between the neighbors. Councilmember Ayala asked what the in lieu fee was for a parking spot. Mr. Swirl replied that it is $8,000 per space. It will soon be updated and will reflect current appraisals. Steven Winter, 216 Spring Street, mentioned a hypothetical situation for shared parking and the impact it has on the sale of his property. Carrie Wevill, 1870 Tanglewood Way, discussed the six parking spaces required for her property on Spring Street. When the property was purchased they were not told that there would possibly be a shared parking situation. She felt the City was forcing her to give up some rights as a property owner in order to get the approval to improve the property. She is willing to do an access easement on the property but not the shared parking. The property is zoned residential and commercial. If they had built the property for residential, lived there for one day and then moved out, they would not have to deal with the parking issue. She felt she has been honest during the whole process and at this point is frustrated. Michael O'Callaghan, 3425 Arbor Drive, cited his builder/developer experience and discussed the number of spaces per 1,000 square feet of property. The design of the properties and trying to stay with the original bungalow style are problems. The property values in the downtown area are going to dictate a different type of construction. People are trying to get commercial uses in existing residential type construction. Other Pleasanton City Council 12 04/02/02 Minutes