PC 031912 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Blank inquired if, assuming the store closes at 11:00 p.m. but the permitted use is until midnight, Nob Hill could have stayed open until midnight without any application to the City. Ms. Amos replied that was correct, as long as it is not a 24 -hour use. Commissioner Blank moved to deny the appeal, thereby upholding the Director of Community Development's determination that Neighborhood Market is a supermarket permitted use allowed by the PUD, consistent with the General Plan Land Use policies and programs, that the proposed hours of operation and delivery limits are consistent with existing zoning approvals, and that the operation without modification to the site, building exterior, or parking lot is a properly issued zoning certificate. Commissioner Narum seconded the motion. Commissioner Olson stated that he was going to vote to deny the appeal. He noted that this will probably go to the City Council and that it would be great if there were a similar turnout then. He noted that one of the speakers stated this is a simple issue, and he agreed it is a simple issue. He emphasized that it is not about WalMart, it is not about the union; it is about land use and permitted use. He added that there is no question in his view that if a City Councilmember votes to uphold this appeal, it is an irresponsible vote; it is a vote against Pleasanton, and it is a vote that does not recognize the land use situation here. He indicated that he wanted to get that on the record. Commissioner Narum stated that she will be voting to deny the appeal. She noted the Commissioner Olson could not have said it better, noting that this is just strictly about the land use and probably one of the easiest ones she has seen come through where is consistent. She added that there is nothing here to quibble about so she is happy tc deny the appeal. Commissioner Pearce stated that she agrees with everybody else. She indicated that this is a permitted use, and there are no land use issues here. She noted that everybody knows she probably has the most expansive view of the Planning Commission's purview for being up here, and even she does not think that there are any land use issues. She added that this is a political discussion happening in front of an apolitical body, and she wished it had gone to the City Council first. She indicated that she is voting to deny the appeal. Commissioner Blank commented that it is just a little disappointing that the Appellants were not present. Chair Pentin concurred. He added that as was mentioned by some speakers, he was also very disappointed that the Appellants were not here tonight to speak to explain why they appealed this. He stated that this is a land use issue, at least in front of the Planning Commission, and that he will also be supporting denial of the appeal. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 19, 2012 Page 14 of 15