A neighborhood dispute over a Pleasanton family’s plans to install six lights on the tennis court in their backyard will be going before the City Council Tuesday for a final decision on how to move forward with the project.
Even though the city’s planning commission and zoning administrator previously approved an application for the residents of 2207 Martin Ave. to install the six approximately 15-foot-tall tennis court lights in their backyard, their neighbors have continued to argue reasons for why the lights will have a negative impact on their neighborhood.
The proposal to install the tennis court lights dates back to August 2023 when the planning commission first reviewed an application related to a partially built tennis court at the residence. While the applicant, Ashish Choudhary, did not bring up plans for any lights at the time, he told the commissioners he did not want lighting to be prohibited in the future.
While the tennis court application was ultimately approved, the city required Choudhary to submit a separate administrative design review for the installation of lights over 8 feet tall.
Choudhary submitted an initial application for the proposed 15-foot lights in May 2024, but after negative input from surrounding neighbors and other factors, the commission denied that application.
One of the key reasons commissioners cited for denying the application was a lack of analysis surrounding the impact of the lighting on surrounding homes.
However, on July 18 of this year the city’s zoning administrator held a public hearing and approved the Administrative Design Review application to install the lights after the applicant provided the city with a detailed analysis on the impact of the lights, which showed how no light spillover would occur because the lights would face downward and would include preventative shields.
Despite the light study, a pair of neighbors who live adjacent to the applicants on Dennis Drive filed an appeal after the zoning administrators decision, with the hopes of making their case to the planning commission when it was set to review and approve the application during its Sept. 10 meeting.
According to Tuesday’s staff report, the neighbors who appealed the project were out of town that week and were unable to attend the meeting. Without any appellants present to state their objections, the commission moved the project forward that evening.
Since then, the neighbors filed another appeal on Sept. 25 so that they could make their case against the project to the City Council.
The grounds for the appeal — apart from not being able to argue against the project during the Sept. 10 commission meeting — includes issues with the classification of the proposed tennis court lights and fencing, according to the Nov. 4 staff report. The appellants state that per the city’s municipal code, the project would require a 20-foot setback, which it currently does not have.
City staff wrote in the agenda report that they recommend upholding the decisions by the planning commission and zoning administrator to move forward with the project.
“The Planning Commission denied the prior appeal and upheld the Zoning Administrator’s approval, based on the consideration of the proposed tennis court lighting conformance to the (planned unit development) approval, and design measures, supported by appropriate technical analysis, all of which indicate that the project would minimize potential off-site impacts to neighboring residences,” staff stated in the Nov. 4 agenda report.
The City Council meeting is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. Tuesday (Nov. 4). The full agenda can be accessed here.
In other business:
* The council is set to vote on giving City Manager Gerry Beaudin authorization to award Citygate Associates, a local government consulting firm, with a nearly $250,000 professional services agreement to conduct a comprehensive citywide organizational assessment.
The council was set to vote on the item during its Oct. 21 meeting but it was continued to this Tuesday.
According to staff, the 12-month assessment will “evaluate operational efficiencies, organizational structure, staffing resources, customer service delivery, and revenue opportunities.”
Funding for the assessment will come out of the city manager’s contingency fund.
“An investment in a comprehensive organizational assessment is anticipated to generate cost savings and operational efficiencies through the implementation of Citygate Associates’ recommendations,” the staff report states. “Based on Citygate Associates’ experience with comparable municipalities, organizational assessments typically identify opportunities for cost savings, revenue enhancement, and efficiency improvements that will exceed the cost of the study when implemented.”
* Staff will be seeking council’s approval of the city’s Long-Term Sewer Capital Improvement Plan, which includes prioritized sewer-related projects over a 20-year period, that can be implemented under three different scenarios.
The item was also continued from the Oct. 21 council meeting.
* As part of the council’s consent calendar, which are items that are considered routine in nature and are typically approved by a single vote, the council will be voting on giving Beaudin the authorization to issue a fourth amendment to a professional services agreement with Mark Thomas & Company to complete the 100% design for Phase 2 of the West Las Positas Multimodal Reconstruction Project.
The amendment will be for $999,954, which brings the new total contract amount to just under $4 million, for the design to extend road improvements from the Iron Horse Trail near Owens Drive to Santa Rita Road.
