PC 10/09/96 - Laserfiche WebLink

. . . 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. PUD-91-15-2M/MS-96-09. Nancv Mont!!Omerv Application for a major modification to an approved Planned Unit Development to subdivide a 1.58 acre parcel into two lots, .75 acres each, where the PUD requirement is for minimum one-acre lots. The property is located at 3800 Trenery Drive. Zoning for the property is POO (Planned Unit Development) - LDR (Low Density Residential) District. Continued to October 23, 1996. b. PUD-85-08-9D. Red Robin Restaurant Application for design review approval to construct an approximately 7,240 square foot sit- down restaurant located at the northwest corner of Rosewood Drive and Owens Drive. Zoning for the property is MCOIPD (Mixed Commercial Office Industrial Planned Development) District. Continued to October 23, 1996. c. PUD-81-30-35M/PUD-85-8-16M. Prudential Insurance Application for a major modification of the Hacienda Business Park POO development plan to allow hotels/motels on Lots 52, 53A, 55A & B, 56C, and 57 A, B, & C located in the Hacienda Business Park. Zoning for the property is PUD (planned Unit Development) - I/C-O (Industrial/Commercial-Office) District. Mr. Iserson presented the staff report on the application for a major modification of the Hacienda Business Park PUD development plans and design guidelines to allow hotels and motels as permitted uses on Parcels 52, 53A, 55A and B, 56C, 57A, B and C. Mr. Iserson advised that at the present time there are only three parcels within the Hacienda Business Park allowing hotel/motel use. This is the result of an agreement approved years ago to limit the amount of hotels in the park. Last year, a minor modification application was submitted to add the hotel/motel use to CPD- and MCOIPD-zoned parcels. The Zoning Administer approved this request; however, the City Council requested it be reviewed as a major modification. The question raised at that time was would the increase in hotel rooms preclude Pleasanton from being considered for a convention hotel facility. The previous application was withdrawn, and this application has been submitted. Since that time, staff has determined it would not be in the best interest of the City to support this modification. Staff would prefer to review such applications on a case-by-case basis in order to be able to monitor the market demand and influences to ensure the City does not get over- extended with hotel rooms. Further, the General Plan has a provision that the sites adjacent the BART station be subject to a land use study to consider different land use alternatives. Staff feels it may be premature to go forward and add hotel uses before this study is done. Therefore, staff feels the findings of the proposed major modification cannot be made and recommends denial of Case PUD-81-30-35M and Case PUD-85-8-16M. In response to Commissioner Wright, Mr. Iserson clarified that if the modification is approved, the Planning Commission MInutes Page 2 October 9,1996