12 - Laserfiche WebLink

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its meeting of September 23, 2009, the Planning Commission listened to public comment and then acted to recommend to the City Council the Draft Negative Declaration and the proposed rezoning on two of the three sites (Sites 1 and 2) (see Planning Commission Minutes, Attachment 2). The Planning Commission stated that rezoning Sites 1 and 2 would satisfy the commitment made by the City in Program 19.1 of the Housing Element to rezone land sufficient to meet the remaining unmet Regional Housing Need Assessment (RHNA), but thought that rezoning of any additional sites within Hacienda should be deferred until after the Planned Unit Development modification process, at which time the potential impact on schools, parks and other infrastructure would have been assessed more thoroughly. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Find that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment and adopt a resolution approving the attached Negative Declaration; 2. Find that the proposed PUD rezoning from Planned Unit Development Industrial Commercial -Office (PUD- I /C -O) to Planned Unit Development Mixed Use (PUD -MU) is consistent with the General Plan; 3. Introduce the attached draft ordinance approving Case PRZ -48, rezoning three sites as shown in Exhibit A from Planned Unit Development Industrial Commercial -Office (PUD- I /C -O) to Planned Unit Development Mixed Use (PUD -MU) FINANCIAL STATEMENT There is no financial impact to the City as a result of this action. BACKGROUND In April 2003 the City Council adopted a Housing Element which provided (in Program 19.1) that the City would complete land use studies to identify sites that could be converted from non residential to high density residential uses, and following those studies to modify the General Plan Land Use Element and rezone land sufficient to accommodate 871 multifamily residential units. That is, in April 2003 because the City had zoning in place to accommodate all of its regional need for low and very low income housing except for 871 low or very low income housing units, the City represented it would complete land use studies to identify sites that could, if developed, accommodate 871 high density residential housing units. With that commitment in place, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) purported to certify the City's Housing Element conditionally, although there is no statutory or regulatory authority for HCD to conditionally certify Housing Elements. In March 2005, HCD purported to withdraw its conditional certification of the City's Housing Element because these rezonings had not been accomplished. Three years ago, a nonprofit organization, Urban Habitat Program, filed litigation against the City claiming that various City policies and ordinances prevent or hinder the development of affordable housing in Pleasanton. Its allegations include that the City has failed to fully implement Program 19.1 of the 2003 Housing Element. Page 2 of 12