Laserfiche WebLink
lots and that no restaurants and similar types of uses be allowed next <br />to the residential development and that restrictions be put on work <br />hours i.e. Monday through Friday 7:30-5:00 P.M. Further he asked <br />that concerning page 9, #7 of the staff report that the developer <br />be made to adhere to this restriction. He further stated he wanted <br />dust control to be addressed. <br />John P. Corley, 3744 Trenery, attorney for Utility Vault spoke stating <br />the business park would be compatible with the industrial users of the <br />area and they support the application of John Caroline as proposed. <br />Bill Finch, Utility Vault, 800 Valley Avenue spoke. Fie answered a <br />question of Commissioner Jamieson stating that they had to fill <br />12 ft. but this was not where the building was put. <br />Bob Coombs, 1797 Santa Rita Road stated this development is the <br />best thing that ever happened to Pleasanton and commended John Caroline. <br />Robert Pearson, 3590 Churchill spoke against this project. He <br />addressed sewers, traffic and other concerns. <br />Commissioner Leppert stated that all PUDs have a condition attached <br />wherein the developer is made aware sewage may not be available. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />Mr. Harris reminded the Commission that this application is for rezoning <br />not approval of the development. He stated the soils report would be <br />needed for development approval. <br />Commissioner Geppert then addressed traffic impacts and the effects on <br />Valley Avenue and Main Street. <br />Commissioner Getty stated that traffic won't be moving very fast as <br />Main Street is quite congested now and that any increase on Main <br />Street is bad. She stated that she hoped the Peters Avenue extension <br />would be put through soon. <br />Commissioner Geppert addressed the railroad consolidation south of <br />the site. Mr. Harris stated it has been approved by the State PUC <br />subject to an agreement reached. He stated money has been allocated <br />from the State. <br />Commissioner Geppert then asked if the City had ever investigated any <br />alternatives to El Charro Road. Mr. Harris stated there is one <br />alternative but it is not practical and that is on Isabel Avenue on <br />the outskirts of Livermore. He stated Livermore doesn't want <br />traffic on Isabel. <br />Commissioners Getty and Jamieson again addressed sewer concerns. Mr. <br />Harris stated that the records show there is capacity taking into <br />account various commitments made by the City. Mr. Harris stated <br />that rezoning does not commit the City to furnishing sewer hookups. <br />-8- <br />