PC 082813 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Inderbitzen stated that California Center needs this change in order to keep its project alive and moving forward. He added that this is a little bit timely because these rezonings took place almost two years ago; they have been going through the process and are anxious to get the construction drawings and bids so they can get under construction next year. He noted that every day that is a delay is a delay in that process because the owner does not want to commit more than the already hundreds of thousands of dollars they have committed to get through the approval process. Mr. Inderbitzen stated that he was not present at the discussions that occurred in 1992 and 1993, but he was very active in the community at that time doing a lot of projects. He suggested that at least one of the issues had to do with what the traffic impacts were relative to residential now appearing in the Business Park. He noted that in this case, that issue has been very well vetted in the Supplemental EIR that came forward with the Housing Element, and it was clear that residential in Hacienda Business Park was not going to be a substitute or trade -off for non - residential or commercial development. He stated that that would not be the right thing to do. Mr. Inderbitzen stated that competitiveness and timing are worth mentioning again. He mentioned an example that probably could not occur in Hacienda under this current environment that did occur just across the street off of Hopyard Road: the expansion of the site for Clorox to come to Pleasanton. He noted that when a hot opportunity like that comes around with a piece of property that is available, one has to be really proactive and reactive in order to get those projects in and built in a timely fashion. He added that with every additional step in the approval process, even if California Center were singled -out moving forward, Mr. Paxson and the Hacienda Owners Association are going to have to deal with this issue with every one of those projects that brushes up against the cap. He encouraged the Commission to move this forward, sooner rather than later, adding that they are also anxious to move forward. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Allen shared that she really struggled with this project and was hoping to get some feedback from others that might help her think this one through because she is still trying to absorb some of the information. She indicated that she is very supportive of high- density residential in Hacienda. She noted that she had been at all the Housing Commission Meetings early on, fighting for that and wishing it would go to Hacienda as that is a perfect fit. She expressed concern with exempting all of the seven sites mentioned. She stated that she is fine with California Center because it is required as to support RHNA, and that was one that the Commission pushed for and were under the gun to do so, and that it would now need to be followed through and allowed to go forward. She added, however, that she was troubled with the others. Commissioner Allen stated that in the big picture, she is thinking of them like Archstone, the Sienna property, and several others where, for the most part, there is land. She referred to the Pleasanton Gateway project, where land that was zoned commercial was allowed by the City to be used for residential, resulting in a win -win for both the City and PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 28, 2013 Page 9 of 16