06 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

15305, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations, Class 5. Therefore, no environmental documents accompany this report. PUBLIC NOTICE Notices regarding the proposed Design Review and Variance applications and related public hearing were mailed to property owners and tenants within 1,000-feet of the subject property. Staff has provided the location and noticing maps as Exhibit I for the Commissions reference. Prior to sending public notification cards, staff had received public comments from residents regarding the proposed application. Staff notes that, if requested by the resident, those public comments were provided to the Planning Commission via email. Of the 19 letters and/or emails received at the time this report was published, 13 were in opposition to the proposal, two had concerns with the proposal but were not necessarily opposed, and two were in support of the proposal (staff notes that two property owners submitted multiple emails). Staff also received a verbal message from the Boags (4558 Second Street) stating similar concerns to those discussed in the emails of non-support. The public comments have been included in Exhibit J for the Commission's consideration. The applicant has requested that the letters of support provided at the April 13, 2011, Planning Commission meeting be included with this staff report. Therefore, staff has included all of the public correspondence from the April 13, 2011, Planning Commission work session in Exhibit J, labeled as "work session" comments. Pleasanton Heritage Association (PHA) The PHA reviewed the plans and provided comments regarding the proposed home. The PHA's comments are related to the size of the proposed home, stating that it is too big, their concerns with needing Variances, and how they believe replacing the existing home (205 Neal Street) would diminish the historic character of the neighborhood. The comments in their entirety are attached as Exhibit K. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The two homes (205 and 215 Neal Street) have the appearance of being on two separate lots. Staff is of the opinion that, although well designed and architecturally consistent with the other homes Downtown, the scale/massing of the proposed home is not appropriate for the "independent lot." However, should the Planning Commission wish to approve the house as proposed, staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1. Make the Variance findings listed in this staff report, and 2. Approve Cases P11-0709 and P11-0717, subject to the conditions shown in Exhibit A. Staff Planner: Natalie Amos, Associate Planner, 925.931.5613, namos(o�ci.pleasanton.ca.us P11-0709/P11-0717, 205 Neal Street Planning Commission 18 of 18