Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING COMMISSION <br />CITY OF PLEASANTON <br />COUNTY OF ALAMEDA <br />STATE OF CALIFORNIA <br />RESOLUTION N0. 2382 <br />A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE <br />CITY OF PLEASANTON RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE <br />APPLICATION OF THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF <br />AMERICA AND CALLAHAN-PENTZ PROPERTIES, PLEASANTON <br />TO REZONE TO THE PUD-INDUSTRIAL/COMT4ERCIAL AND <br />OFFICES DISTRICT AND TO APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN <br />FOR A 573-ACRE BUSINESS PARK EAST OF HOPYARD ROAD <br />AND NORTH OF THE ARROYO MOCHO (PUD-81-30) <br />GkIEREAS, the Prudential Insurance Company of America and <br />Callahan-Pentz Properties, Pleasanton (collectively <br />"Developer") have applied for Planned Unit Development <br />(PUD-Industrial/Commercial and Offices) zoning and <br />development plan approval of a 573 acre project <br />(PUD-81-30, the "Hacienda Business Park") to <br />include approximately 23 net acres of "garden" <br />offices, 62 net acres of general offices, 50 net <br />acres of "mid-rise" offices, 47 net acres of <br />industrial warehousing, 273 net acres of research <br />and development/light manufacturing, and 38 acres <br />of retail/commercial/financial development with <br />the remaining approximately 80 acres to be used <br />for street and flood channel right-of-way purposes, <br />to be located on the east side of Hopyard Road <br />between the Arroyo Plocho and a point approximately <br />1400 feet south of I-580 and extending east to the <br />tracks of the Southern Pacific Transportation <br />Company; and <br />l^IHEREAS, an EIR was prepared, public hearings held, and the <br />EIR was certified as complete and adequate (Resolution <br />No. 82-197), and the project was approved, subject <br />to 109 conditions, on November 9, 1982 (Ordinance <br />1040); and <br />GIHEREAS, the approval was challenged in the Superior Court <br />of Alameda County and on P?arch 16, 1983, the court <br />(i) found that PUD-81-30 was inconsistent with the <br />goals and policies contained in the Growth Management <br />Element of City's General Plan and (ii) ordered <br />that City and City Council vacate and set aside <br />PUD-81-30; and <br />I~IHEREAS, prior to the court order vacating PUD-81-30, the <br />project site was subdivided and improvements and <br />buildings begun, with all 109 conditions of approval <br />incorporated into the CC&R's governing the development <br />-1- <br />