PC-2009-33, PRZ-48, CITY OF PLEASANTON

PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF PLEASANTON ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NO. PC -2009-33 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON TO REZONE TWO SITES IN HACIENDA BUSINESS PARK, AS FILED UNDER CASE PRZ-48 WHEREAS, the City of Pleasanton has applied to rezone three sites in Hacienda Business Park from the PUD-I/C-O (Planned Unit Development — Industrial-Commercial/Office) District to PUD -MU (Planned Unit Development — Mixed Use) District; and to change the Hacienda land use designation from Mixed Office, Research and Development/Light Manufacturing Planning District (MOIPD) to Mixed Commercial, Office, Research and Development/Light Manufacturing Residential District (MCOIRPD): (1) The W.P. Carey site (Hacienda Site 7G), at the southeast corner of Owens Drive and Willow Road (Assessor's Parcel No. 941-2778-013-00 and part of APN 941-2778-012-00), approximately 11 acres; (2) The BRE site (Hacienda Site 7E), at the north corner of Hacienda Drive and Gibraltar Drive (APN 941-2778-011-00), approximately 8.2 acres; and (3) The Roche Molecular Systems site (a portion of Hacienda Site 6), south of Gibraltar Drive between Willow Road and Hacienda Drive (a portion of APN 941-2761-003-00), about 12.4 acres (of the approximate 33.4 -acre Roche site); and WHEREAS, the rezoning of the above sites would potentially allow the future development of up to approximately 1,030 residential units following the preparation and adoption of a Major Modification to the Hacienda PUD rezoning; and WHEREAS, at its duly noticed public hearing of September 23, 2009, the Planning Commission considered all public testimony, relevant exhibits, and recommendations of the City staff concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Negative Declaration prepared for this project for only Sites 1 and 2; and WHEREAS, after review of the materials presented, the Planning Commission determined that the proposed rezoning of only Sites 1 and 2 is consistent with the General Plan and the purposes of the PUD ordinance and is appropriate for the sites.