|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The South Livermore Valley may see new lodging open to the public next year, given the recent approval of a revised hotel project by the Livermore Planning Commission.
Dubbed the Wine Country Inn and The Villas of Livermore Valley, the 24-unit development is slated for a vacant 3.2-acre parcel at the southwest corner of Arroyo and Hansen roads.
The project featuring single-story, cottage-style buildings is set to include 30 rooms, a lobby, guest services building, guest pool and kitchen, a caretaker’s unit and on-site parking for a total building area of approximately 19,100 square feet.
Given the site plan design review modification, the project shifted away from the 2023 City Council-approved plan to construct a 30-room, 29,345-square-foot, two-story inn, 77-seat restaurant and associated caretaker’s unit. However, the applicant is allowed to apply for a sitdown restaurant of up to 100 seats — an element that would require a separate green light from the commission.
Lauded by supporters as providing much-needed lodging in the South Livermore Valley, the project also came under fire by the majority of about 30 commenters at the May 19 Planning Commission meeting for its supposedly unappealing aesthetics and the potential to introduce noise, traffic and safety disruptions.
While tasked with acting in a quasi-judicial capacity, the commission cast a vote of 3-1 in support of the project being consistent with city policies, development and design standards. Commissioner Nadine Horner cast the sole dissenting vote and Chairperson Tracy Kronzak was absent from the meeting.
“This project represents years of hard work and we are incredibly proud of what it has become,” project applicant Michelle Boss said during the meeting. “We truly believe it will be a thoughtful and positive addition to the Livermore community.”
Since the City Council approved the original project in 2023, the design was revised to be more compatible with the neighborhood, Boss explained during the meeting.
The project scale and grading was reduced, the restaurant was eliminated and all building heights were limited to one-story, according to Boss.
Described as a “luxury boutique hotel”, Boss likened the project to four- and five-star accommodations. The cost to stay at the inn is projected to be an average of $475 nightly, she added.
All buildings, except for the pool house, will be constructed off-site and assembled at the project site.
The project has received support from the local organizations including Visit Tri-Valley, Livermore Valley Chamber of Commerce, Tri-Valley Conservancy, the Livermore Valley Wine Community and Alameda County Supervisor David Haubert.
“That level of alignment gives us confidence that this project reflects a shared vision for Livermore’s future,” Boss said.
Among those to voice their support at the meeting was local real estate advisor Mony Nop.
“It’s an investment in Livermore’s future and in our growing agritourism economy,” Nop said of the inn. “Projects like this encourage visitors to stay longer, spend more at local businesses and experience everything that a community has to offer. That benefits not only tourism, but also our local economy as a whole.”
Landing on the opposing side, nearly all of the approximately 30 commenters at the meeting expressed discontent with the reworked project.
“My first impression was that the map resembled a trailer park, but actually it resembles a gathering of tiny homes like those that are offered as temporary housing for homeless people,” Linda Milanese said during the meeting. “They can cover the tiny units in grapevines and call it wine country luxury, but as the saying goes, it’ll be like putting lipstick on a pig.”
Jean King, a member of the Livermore Valley Arts Board of Directors, was among the commenters to request delayed consideration of the hotel.
“I want this project to be a success, but I do not believe it is headed that way now,” she said.
Following the public comment period, Commissioner Jacob Anderson expressed his waning patience for delay requests.
Vineyards are being removed “because our industry can’t sustain itself because we don’t have places like this,” Anderson said.
“I just am getting more and more frustrated by that because that hurts the identity of who we are, the identity that you moved here to enjoy and we’ll just keep losing more of it,” he said.
Anderson also backed the reenvisioned accommodations.
“People are thinking that prefabs are mobile homes or trailer parks and have a real misunderstanding of how nice they can actually be,” Anderson said.
As prefabricated units, their assembly will be less disruptive than standard construction, he added.
Planning commissioners unanimously agreed that the modified project was covered by a previously certified environmental impact report.
When it came time to vote on whether the proposed modifications were compliant with city policies, development and design standards, Horner disagreed on the planning commission’s role in the process.
“I believe that the city council should have the opportunity, since they gave the final approval on this project, to also review this project,” Horner said. “I do not believe the decision should lie to us.”
Upon asking how the planning commission could move the project to city council, Livermore planning manager Steve Riley explained the planning commission was responsible for the final decision.
As part of the 3-1 motion in favor of the project, the planning commission also directed staff to work with the applicant to cap extended stays.
Members of the community have the opportunity to appeal the decision, but the city has not received any appeals as of Tuesday afternoon.
