PC 102506 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Callahan noted that they had worked with staff and the Police Department to meet the security lighting requirements without inflicting light pollution on the neighbors from the rear elevation. They worked to mitigate odors by concentrating the dumpsters in one area and added that they were not heavy user of refuse. He described the anticipated traffic and circulation patterns and flow; he anticipated the maximum would be three cars per minute. He believed this was a better project as a result of working with the neighbors and appreciated working with them. He believed this project would be compatible with the neighborhood because it had limited hours and days. He noted that as a member of the community, he intended to be a good neighbor and to create a use that would enhance the community. Randy Bly, 1022 Zinfandel Court, spoke in support of this project and believed that the two adjacent wineries would make Pleasanton more of a destination for winery visitors. He noted that he was a member of the Pleasanton Downtown Association and believed this would be a positive business to bring to Pleasanton and would support other businesses such as hotels, gas stations, and restaurants. He complimented the applicant on the attractiveness of the building and believed the business plan for this use was sound. He was not concerned about the traffic impact of this business, since most of the activity would occur during non-peak hours. He noted that he did not live in the Ruby Hill neighborhood. Kerry Lamson, 799 Avio Court, spoke in support of this item and noted that he had participated in the neighboring homeowners focus group. He added that the group had met several times with the applicant and City staff and complimented the applicant on his willingness to work with the neighborhood. He noted that the five major areas of concern that they had were: size and proximity to the homes' location; noise and traffic; hours of operation; landscaping, lighting, and azchitectural amenities and their impact on the surrounding area; and safety and security. They had requested the use of shoebox lighting that used timing as well as photocell. He supported the use of landscaping to buffer the view impacts. With respect to noise, they would like to ensure that air conditioning, coolers, and other mechanical noises be mitigated; he would like the good faith offers to be memorialized in writing. He requested that staff ensure that that process occur. He indicated that it was important for the azchitecture to be 360 degrees and four-sided because the neighborhood will be looking at the rear of the facilities. Masood Amini, 3744 Raboli Street, expressed concern about the service of alcohol and believed it would cause a safety hazard on the neighborhood streets. Mary Roberts, 1666 Frog Hill Lane, noted that they had just had their twentieth harvest and spoke in support of this project. She believed this was a different kind of project than the previously proposed shops at Ruby Hill, which she believed was an inappropriate use. She noted that part of the Vineyazd Corridor Specific Plan was in the South Livermore Valley Plan. She believed this use was appropriate for the South Livermore Valley and noted that many of the wineries had event centers. She noted that all the wineries in the azea aze supposed to have crushed gravel driveways so the water will perk down. She had been very concerned about noise when the Palm Event Center had opened and noted PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 25, 2006 Page 5 of 21