18 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

that Nevada Court remain as a court with no through traffic from Home Depot He described the service and event schedule at the synagogue and expressed concern that this use would further increase the noise impact they anticipated from the water park. He noted that their major high holy days occurred in September and October, when quiet and solemn contemplation was expected. He suggested the installation of a stoplight at the already-busy intersection. Ed Arndt, 434 Sangro Court, noted that he was Vice President for Youth Education and Programs at Congregation Beth Emek and described the activities and schedule of their programs. He expected that their religious school will grow over the next few years. He expressed conceal about noise, traffic, and the safety of their children, especially as it related to the outdoor activities. He did not believe the use of Nevada Court for airy traffic mitigation plan for Home Depot would be appropriate. Dan Dunlevy noted that the opening of the nearby water park would draw more children to the area and did not believe this was an appropriate site for a new Home Depot He strongly urged the Commission to consider the seriousness of the traffic. Kelly Fasman, 174 Trenton Circle, noted that she lived in California Reflections, approximately 1,000 feet fiom the proposed site, and expressed concern about the traffic impacts of this use. She believed that while the site was commercially zoned, this was much too large a store for this location. She believed the PUD did not include a project this large for a good reason and requested that this use be given careful examination. Darryl Alexander, 849 Montevino Drive, spoke in support of this application. He noted that he shopped at Home Depot frequently and would like to see the store at this location. He believed the new location would actually reduce traffic. Drew Williams noted that he ran California Shingle and Shake at Stanley Business Park and believed that another Home Depot in the vicinity was unnecessary. He was concerned about the increase of traffic in Stanley Business Park, which was already difficult to ingress and egress. He did not believe this would improve the quality of life in Pleasanton. Prank Doljack, 715 Montevino Drive, spoke in opposition to this item. He believed this use would not be appropriate for this location and would impact traffic negatively. He had not yet seen any t•affic mitigations for this development. Chris Beratlis believed this use would be an asset to the City and added that it provided a cohesive retail unit rather than ten unrelated stores. He trusted the City would address the traffic issues adequately. Jolm Peterson, 857 Montevino Drive, noted that he was tired of driving across town to go to a Home Depot and supported this project in this location. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Maas why Home Depot was the first choice for hardware rather than a smaller hardware store, Mr. Peterson replied that Home Depot carried a much larger variety of hardware and other contractor materials. He added that smaller lumber stores generally have higher prices. EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, January ] 1, 2006 Page 3 of 7