PC 021308 - Laserfiche WebLink

Michael O'Callaghan noted that he had called the Planning Department specifically to ensure that the projector would operate properly, and the fact that the projector did not work seriously impacted his ability to properly present his case. He did not believe this application should be a Planning Commission matter and did not believe this was a constructive use of the Commissioners' expertise. He did not believe a dispute over a property line should be brought before the Planning Commission. He had prepared an arduous contest to Mr. Iserson's staff report, which he believed contained misnomers, misstatements, and what he felt to be misrepresentations; he intended to address those items before the City Council and possibly before a court of law. He intended to seek a productive solution. He noted that the Pereira partnership cannot take on the liability of this emergency egress, which included the taking of a piece of property without proper compensation to include an emergency access, when there were at least two other Code- compliant emergency accesses. He noted that since Mr. Pereira was willing to grant access to the property and Haps' dumpsters to Pleasanton Garbage, that became the line in the sand from which to negotiate. He noted that there was no health and safety code that required him to do so and that the only Code issue was that no one shall obstruct the pick-up of the garbage. He noted that Hap's was able to take their garbage to Main Street through the use of garbage cans. On behalf of the applicants, he presented the following proposal: 1. The Pereira Partnership was willing to enter into a licensing agreement with Hap's to allow Pleasanton Garbage to pickup the garbage. For $50 monthly, they would clean the oil spills and other messes. Hap's will participate in the deferred maintenance in anticipation that their garbage trucks will damage the parking lot; and 2. The 12-foot-wide alleyway between Hap's and the Gale Building was part of the agreement and part of a publicly noticed hearing ordinance for the egress to Neal Street. He did not believe that either the Planning Commission or the City Manager had the legal right to change the legal emergency access as agreed. He noted that it should be maintained and enforced. Gary Torretta noted that he was a member of the Pereira Partnership and supported his partners. He acknowledged that this had been along-running and emotionally-charged ordeal and that no one wanted this situation to become any more unpleasant. Mike Madden distributed the actual-size plan submitted by the Pereira Partnership for the wall, which was approximately the size of the business card. He agreed with Mr. O' Callaghan's statement that it was embarrassing to bring this issue before the Planning Commission and that he did not believe it was appropriate to build a wall based on a plan on a small strip of paper. He noted that once the wall had been built, a series of meetings commenced to craft a compromise. He had met with staff and Mr. Pereira, including a meeting with Mr. Pereira and his contractor, and another meeting with Mr. Pereira and his attorney. Mr. Pereira's in-town partner had attended a meeting, as did his out-of--town partner. He noted that he had attended many meetings and that on one occasion, he had PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 13, 2008 Page 9 of 42