PC 072507 - Laserfiche WebLink

THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Ria Hutabarat, 101-C Neal Street, stated that mixed-use being developed as a cohesive project does not mean it needed to have a single owner or be developed at the same time but rather, as a diversity of building ages which would make for a more interesting streetscape for pedestrians. Ms. Stern confirmed that it would not be required to have a single owner and could evolve over time. James Paxson, Hacienda Business Park, 4473 Willow Road, Suite 105, complimented staff for its work on the Draft Land Use Element, noting that the goals, policies, and program are extremely supportive of Hacienda’s project. He added that they were encouraged when the City Council and Planning Commission took the position to allow some flexibility in the development of the Hacienda Specific Plan. He noted, however, that Hacienda cannot come up with a viable development plan with only the 333 units allocated under the Preferred Plan. He requested the Commission to forward to the City Council the recommendation discussed earlier to re-allocate to Hacienda’s proposed project the units discovered through the re-evaluation of units under the cap and those allocated to Staples Ranch as these additional units would be important components that would encourage Hacienda and the stakeholders to put forth a good planning effort that the Planning Commission, City Council, and the community would like to see. In response to Commissioner Pearce’s inquiry regarding the number of units Hacienda is looking at as its baseline to make its project feasible, Mr. Paxson replied that Hacienda could probably find a good convergence with the project in the neighborhood of 850 to 900 units, which would consist of the 333 allocations plus the extra units discovered and the Staples Ranch units. Chairperson Fox inquired if, with regard to the mixed-use designation, Hacienda’s proposal is to convert the existing buildings to residential as they get older, to build residential units in current vacant spaces, or to convert existing commercial office buildings to residential units now. Mr. Paxson replied that Hacienda would like to allow the Specific Plan to start to designate the particular combination of uses for the various sites. He added that in 2003 when the City was working on the Housing Element, Hacienda had the opportunity to look at the buildings on West Las Positas Boulevard, but that opportunity no longer exists at this time. He added that there might be future opportunities in the long term, but no density allocation is being given to these sites now. He stated that the first part of the Specific Plan is focused on existing vacant land close to the BART station, underutilized land, and a new combination of uses on existing land. In response to Chairperson Fox’s inquiry regarding whether Hacienda’s redesignation and its Specific Plan include setting aside a site for an elementary school, Mr. Paxson replied that this would be based on the Pleasanton Unified School District’s direction. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 25, 2007 Page 11 of 35