RES 01063 - Laserfiche WebLink

pazking ar~a would furnish ~ ~4~pool space, six handicapped spa~s, and six stubbed-out el~ ve. hid~ r~l~rging stations..Driveray aisle wiclths are suff~i~nt to accommoda~ the Bicycle ~ would be located on the east side of the building. Hacienda Park Design Guidelines require that bicycle parking be equivalent to 3.5 percent of the total number of parking spaces provided on the site, equaling six spaces. The applicant has proposed a covev~l bicycle rack system for nine bicycles or S percent of the building occupant. Shower facilities would be provided in the first floor restroom, for employees usi~ alternative modes of ~1, staff believes that the parking design and quantity of spaces shown will be adequate to serve the needs of future users. L~d Use Ha~ie~ Retulatious - This is the first application for a reuse or expansion of a developed site in Hacue~da Park beyond that identified in the original appwval. It raises several issues which are important for the Commission to recognize as it reviews this application. Hacienda as it eVolved was covered by three development agreements which had one effect, among many, of restricting Pleasanton's normal unilateral ability to rezone property. This site was governed by the lb'st development agreement which has lapsed. Thus, this site is, from a zoaing perspective, no different than the typical site: it has existing zoning "entitlements," but these can be modified by unilateral City action. In this instance, the existing . ~z~ming allows both the present restaurant use and the proposed office use as "permitted" uses. Thus, only a design review action is required to approve the proposed office building, as the "use" is currently permitted. However, should the City wish to disallow office uses on this site, it is free to do so by taking the appropriate actions to rezone the site to eliminate office uses as allowed. Hacienda as approved included a zoning scheme designed to allow flexibility for the intensity of development of individual lots but included a cap on total square footage that could be built throughout the Park. This tOtal is significantly less than the theoretical sum of the maximum allowable square feet for each lot. In a sense, the first users of allowable development are allowed to take it, first-come, first-served. In practice, the "cap" on total development has be n closely monitored as the Park has built out so that there would be sufficient floor area for each lot. In 1992 Pleasanton and Prudential, the owner of most of the then unbuilt lots, entered into a new devdopm~t agreement in which the total cap as applied .to undeveloped lots was reduced by about a million square feet. This was done to give the City some 'cushion~ from traffic Ca~e No. P~DD-81-30-84D Page 5