09 ATTACHMENT 05 - Laserfiche WebLink

7. Exhibit F: Deed of Perpetual Agricultural Conservation Easement 8. Exhibit G: Comments from Ruby Hill HOA and resident 9. Exhibit H: Negative Declaration 10. Location Map BACKGROUND The subject site is located within the Ruby Hill Planned Unit Development (PUD-93-02). The overall development was originally approved by Alameda County prior to its annexation to the City of Pleasanton in 1993. Development of the site is subject to the County's planned development conditions of approval, the Ruby Hill Development Agreement, the South Livermore Valley Area Plan policies, and conformance to the Conservancy Easement with Tri- Valley Conservancy requirements. An existing conservation easement limits the amount of land not in grape production to a maximum of 2.5 acres. Existing uses on the site are planted grapes and an existing two-story building previously used as the Ruby Hill sales office. Permitted uses within the 2.5-acre conservation easement include but are not limited to: homes, wineries, tasting rooms, restaurants, and lodging. Signatures Properties, Inc. was the developer of Ruby Hill. In February 1994, a building permit was issued for the construction of a two-story to be used as a temporary sales office and information center for the Ruby Hill development. The access to and from the sales office is via Ruby Hill Boulevard, and the sales office is connected to the City sewer via a private sewer line and private sewer pump located under Ruby Hill Drive. The applicant, Mr. Nagy, proposes to convert the existing sales office to a restaurant. Mr. Nagy has requested a major modification of the Ruby Hill development plan to create a future home site. He is also requesting consideration of a conditional use permit to allow alcohol sales after 10:00 p.m. Major modifications are subject to review by the Planning Commission and by the City Council. Conditional Use Permit normally is subject to the approval by the Planning Commission. Since the proposed modification focuses on the restaurant use, staff thought it is necessary to have use permit be reviewed together with the PUD modification. PUD-93-02-09M/PCUP-182 Planning Commission Page - 2 -