RES 01063 - Laserfiche WebLink

employees, or other measures that will further reduce outbound trips during the p.m. peak; or Deny the appeal Imsed on the proposed traff~c impacts that result from the change in us~ and the proposed additional square footage on the site. c. With to the building's architecture: 1. Approve the architecture as proposed; 2. Recomm~ minor modifications to the design that can be conditioned into tbe proj~t-- e.g. color changes, window placement, etc. (More substantial modifications may create conflicts with the overall architecture of the building.); or 3. Agree with the p~snnln~ Commission that the architecture is not suitable for the site and give specific direction to staff and the applicant on redesi.%mln5 the building. If this option is selected, the Council should indicate whether a traditional garden office, an office with more residential character, or another type of office building is preferred. These options can be combined in various ways. For example, the land use can be found acceptable while redesign is requested; the use and architecture could be found acceptable, but additional traffic mitigation could be sought. Obviously, if the use is found unacceptable, the Council need not address the other issues, etc. The Council may wish to establish its collective on each sub-topic prior to formalizing a motion on the project as a whole. I )ACT As a change in use on the affected parcel, the proposed office building Would not generate an ~ in the requirement for City services. A new building would bring a new assessment and likely increased revenue. Neither of these effects is significant to Pleasanton's fiscal well- being. An Environmenial Iml~ct Report was prepared in conjunction with thc PUD approval for the entile Hscieoda Park. The proposed project is within th~ scoPe of the EIR; therefore, no environmental document accompanies this ~-port. SR01:069 ~6