PC 101905 - Laserfiche WebLink

with the current building codes and that the South Valley plan was dependent on viticultural and commercial suecess_ In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding the amount of wine that could be produced on this property, Mr. Wente replied that it would be between 10,000 and 15,000 cases. Perry Hayes, 3067 Bersano Court, spoke in opposition to this item and noted that he had n~aoved to Pleasanton from Austin, Texas in 2000_ He was very concerned that the proposed project would signit3cantly change the character of the con-an~aunity they bought into. He noted that the Ruby Hill Development Plan did not originally have comniercia] purposes zoned into the area, and they felt soai-acwhat betrayed that this developn~aent has been brought forward_ lIc viewed this change as a foram of breach of contract. HE believed the proposed project would be a blight on the landscape and did not want the traffic and congestion of Napa Valley brought into Ruby Hill_ He noted that Wente wanted commercial development to benefit the wine center of Livermore and added that this was in Pleasanton. and would affect the community. He believed that if the zoning standards were broken on this particular parcel, it would set a bad precedent for the rest of Vineyard Avenue_ He noted that there ware many comments at the Ruby Hill meeting about the economic viability of this project. He had been to Blackhawk Plaza. with the retail stores adjacent to affluent neighborhoods, and they were not well supported by the neighbors with a 20 to 30 percent turnover of stores. He believed that the caliber of the stores had deteriorated and. did not want that to happen in Ruby Hill. He was concerned that the property values acid tax base would be damaged. Dave Cunningham, 2463 Pomino Way, spoke in opposition to changing the zoning in this area. He noted that there was already era existing commercial building on Isabel Avenue in Livermore. He noted that the Pleasanton Deli .just went out of business, with plenty of pedestrian traffic. He added that the retail n~aix was not viable for this area and noted that Blackhawk Plaza was noti doing well economically, with eight times the number of homes surrounding it_ Shashank Kapre, 2864 W_ Ruby Hill Drive, noted that he has worked in comarierci al real estate and spoke in opposition to this itcn~_ He believed the drawings were a. distraction from the larger issue of changing the General Plan. Kara Simone, 2694 Casalino Court, stated that she had attended the meeting held by the corporation. She had initially supported the project before the meeting but did not feel it was the right project at this time. She was concerned that the businesses may not be econon-aically feasible and cited the example of the Vintage 1-fills Shopping Center being vacant for so long. She would like the existing buildings to become viable before more businesses were added and suggested tabling the project until the viability of the businesses could be determined. She noted that Blackhawk Plaza was frequently empty. She was in favor of awine-related use, as opposed to a shopping center. Gary Harrington, 444 Cabonia Court, opposed the 50,000-square-foot comaercial center located in the Ruby Hill developcracnt. He cited the failure of the Vintage Hills Shopping Center and was concerned that a sirrailar economic failure would occur within this development. He was very concerned about traffic congestion that niay result from this project. He did not believe this was an appropriate project [or the community and did not want visitor traffic to further congest the streets. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTPS C>ctober 19, 2005 Page 1 1 of 19