My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
15
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
051915
>
15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 12:12:59 PM
Creation date
5/12/2015 3:47:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
5/19/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
PUBLIC NOTICE <br /> Notice of this appeal was sent to surrounding property owners within a 1,000-foot radius of <br /> the site. After completion of the staff report, but prior to publication, Mr. Monzo submitted <br /> additional correspondence that has been included within Attachment 3. No other letters in <br /> opposition or support of the project were received. The location and noticing maps are <br /> included as Exhibit H within the Planning Commission Staff Report. <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT <br /> This project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California <br /> Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15303, New Construction, Class 3. <br /> Therefore, no environmental document accompanies this report. <br /> CONCLUSION <br /> Staff has reviewed the proposed project as well as various alternative ideas that have <br /> been suggested to move or redesign the home and its location on the lot. Staff believes <br /> that the approved location would cause the least disturbance to the grading and natural <br /> topography of the site in accordance with the suggested building envelope set forth in the <br /> Design Guidelines. Staff supports the suggested building envelope as originally envisioned <br /> and approved by the City Council with the development of Golden Eagle Farm because it <br /> is protective of the aesthetic character, vegetation, and topography of the neighborhood. In <br /> addition, staff believes that the project is in accordance with the approved PUD and <br /> development standards outlined in the Design Guidelines and that the proposed home <br /> would be an attractive addition to the Golden Eagle area and designed or conditioned to <br /> conform to the PUD development plan and Design Guidelines. The proposed project is <br /> compatible in terms of site and building design with the development pattern of the Golden <br /> Eagle Farm neighborhood. Therefore, staff recommends adopting the resolution to deny <br /> the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's approval, subject to the original <br /> Conditions of Approval. <br /> Submitted by: Fiscal Review: Approved by: <br /> ftt <br /> Ai47 <br /> Steve Kirkp- ck Tina Olson Nelson Fialho <br /> Acting Director of Director of Finance City Manager <br /> Community Development <br /> Page 8 of 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.