PC 031407 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chairperson Fox wanted to ensure the cumulative effects of the numbers of students were taken into account. She noted that at the Pump It Up facility near the Valley Business Park, neighbors have had to put up signs stating “Absolutely No Pump It Up Parking” on their streets. She was concerned about this possibility and inquired whether the applicant would have to check a box regarding that level of parking. Ms. Decker replied that each facility would need to show how parking was being met. Ms. Harryman advised that an email was sent out by Chairperson Fox on Thursday, March 8, 2007. The email sent by Chairperson Fox to the City Council and copied to all the Planning Commissioners discussed sigh-ins and sign-outs, licensing requirements, and other related items. She noted that it was somewhat related to the current item, but related more to the Council’s discussion at their last meeting. She noted that because it could be construed as a violation of the Brown Act, which was created to ensure that discussions, deliberations, and decisions are made in public, she wished to remind the Planning Commission of this fact and did so in public to remedy any potential violation of the Brown Act, giving the public an opportunity to see or hear what may have been discussed outside the public forum. She provided copies of the email to the Planning Commission and the audience and reminded the Commission that anything within this Commission’s subject matter needs to be discussed, whether in person, on the phone, by mail or by email, in the public forum. She cautioned the Commissioners to take care not to hit “Reply All” in emails and stated any questions on agenda items should be sent to Principal Planner, Donna Decker, who can then distribute them to the Commission in the packets so the public also has the opportunity to see it at the same time. She noted that it was entitled “Provisions and CUPs for Child Safety, Tri-Valley After-school Sports and Martial Arts Programs, Tutoring Programs, Montessori Schools, etc.,” and it was originally sent on March 8 to the City Council, some City staff members and some persons in Dublin. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Peter MacDonald, Pleasanton Downtown Association, noted that Christine Salidivar asked him to speak in support of the change in ordinance. He supported the idea of simplifying the ordinance, allowing people to register without needing to go through a six-month discretionary use process that often killed small businesses. He did not agree with the change in one word that greatly increased the control of government over a small existing business. He recalled the background of Mrs. Berg’s case and noted that the 600-square-foot space she used did not generate a large parking problem. He believed the landlord could have handled it if needed. He believed the requirement for the one-hour fire wall for that small space was excessive and added that the then City Manager, Deborah McKeehan, did not believe it reflected common sense. He believed that the objective standards of this ordinance that did not require discretionary requirements was a step in the right direction. He could see a concern about a dance studio, but a tutoring business in an office building did not need that kind of fire insulation. He added that objective standards obviated the need for government micromanagement. He noted that when a small issue got to the political level, noticing PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 14, 2007 Page 14 of 21