15 - Laserfiche WebLink

AT T * t L iMENT 5 Zoning Code Update—Public Comments /; E.:AC17,1\711N December 13,2016 Mr Adam Weinstein Planning Manager City of Pleasanton 200 Bernal Avenue Pleasanton,CA 94566 Re Zoning Code Amendment Dear Adam This letter is being pros ided as comment on the proposcd Zoning Code amendment currently under consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council The Hacienda Owners Association w ould like to commend staff for the excellent work done in performing the update that is currently being reviewed The tasks staff have undertaken to make the code more responsive to those engaged in city business with zoning considerations and to addiess inconsistencies that have developed over the years is greatly appreciated Given the passage of time that has occurred since the last thorough review and update was performed,the effort was obv iously significant However,as much as the effort is valued,the greater significance is the benefit that the public at laige will des we froma planning process with greater transpai envy and clarity concerning zoning issues Given the extent of the proposed changes,it will be impossible to ascertain the full impact of the code amendment until it is put into practice We have been encouraged by the dialogue that has taken place to date that suggests staff will work with those who will be using any adopted code as it is implemented so that there is a fair application of the new standards and a process developed that w ill provide ongoing input into the need for any subsequent modifications Such an iterative process of evaluation and amendment is particularly essential to making sure that a key piece of city law stays responsiv e to the evoh Brig needs of the community and local economy Furthermore,we agree with the conclusions drawn in the staff r eport that while the amendments proposed are a very good first step,there is still additional work that needs to be performed There as e a few areas of particular note where we would ask the city to commit to addressing both cei tarn singular tasks and an ongoing process to make sure that the zoning code is able to fulfill its purpose both now and in the future Key among these areas are the following • While the proposed Permitted and Conditional Uses table notes that, in cases where use question^ involve sites that as e zoned as PUDs,the PUDs should be consulted prior to consulting the table there is no clear du ection p ovided as to what happens in the event of a discrepancy between an approved PUD and direction provided by the table More importantly, there is no clear indication that such discrepancies would not leave room for the interpretation that a nonconforming use condition subject to Chapter 18 120 exists as a result of such a disparity Given the extent to which this situation is likely to be found, and the attendant implications for both the ability to implement a similar use interpretation for future situations and make changes to a use at an existing location, it is critically important that additional clanty be brought to this issue so that those subject to PUDs may be able to rely on the internal consistency that it designed within each PUD through the creation of their unique, site-specificregulations It is also likely that,in many cases,this issue will need to be similarly addressed within individual PUDs as well and,for our part,we will be more than willing to work with staff to make such modifications that as e needed to Hacienda's PUD to i esolve this matter • The implementation of the new zoning update will require some interpretation as specific instances arise that do not allow for dearapplica tion of the code In those cases where this occurs,we would ask 4305 Hacienda D,Iva Suite 330 Pleasanton Cshf rrua 94588 2738 Phtma 925 734 6500 Fax 925 734 6501 a mil inf @lnauends org zvvetn www hacienda org 3