AGENDA FULL PACKET - Laserfiche WebLink

P23-0599, 5976 & 5994 W. Las Positas Blvd. Planning Commission 8 of 8 Interpretation of SB 330 The applicant’s legal counsel has sent the City a number of letters, taking the position that, based on a provision of SB 330 (Government Code, §65589.5(j)(4)), the project does not require a rezoning. (Exhibit H) Section 65589.5(j)(4) states in relevant part that “a proposed housing development project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing development project is consistent with the objective general plan standards and criteria but the zoning for the project site is inconsistent with the general plan.” (Emphasis added.) The applicant’s legal counsel appears to take the position that, because the project is consistent with the Mixed Use General Plan land use designation, the zoning exemption applies. As staff notified the applicant in its December 18, 2023 courtesy letter, staff disagrees with this interpretation because the relevant question is whether the existing zoning is inconsistent with the General Plan – not whether the project is consistent with the General Plan.3 Here, the existing zoning for the subject parcel is clearly consistent with the General Plan.4 Staff further disagrees with the assertion that the General Plan permits residential development of the type proposed, since the General Plan defers to the applicable Planned Unit Development; in this instance, the Hacienda PUD designates this particular property as OGPD, where the only residential use allowed is nursing homes and senior care/assisted living facilities. PUBLIC NOTICE / PUBLIC COMMENT Notice of the application was sent to the surrounding property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the site. At the time this report was published, staff had not received any public comments about the project. Any additional public comments received after publication of this report will be forwarded to the Planning Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CEQA does not apply to projects that the City rejects or disapproves. (CEQA Guidelines § 15270.) CONCLUSION The applications for Design Review and Vesting Tentative Tract Map are inconsistent with relative General Plan provisions and the applicable PUD zoning for the site, as the applications propose general residential development where Nursing Homes/Assisted Living Facilities are the only types of residential uses allowed. Primary Author: Diego Mora, Associate Planner, 925-931-5618 or dmora@cityofpleasantonca.gov. Reviewed/Approved By: Dan Sodergren, City Attorney Ellen Clark, Director of Community Development 3 Snowball West Investments, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles (2023) 96 Cal. App. 5th 1054. 4 The General Plan's Mixed Use designation references and defers to the applicable Planned Unit Development (see General Plan Page 2-23). Specifically, the General Plan states: “The location of specific land uses in areas designated Mixed Use is determined by the associated PUD zoning or specific plan.” In this instance, the Hacienda PUD designates the subject parcel/site (l\Lot 20) as Garden Office (OGPD), which is consistent with the General Plan’s Mixed Use designation.