18 - Laserfiche WebLink

® No. 34 - require repair and replacement of clubhouse's structural resources when they become worn and/or damaged; and ® No. 108 — strikeout "unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer." Exhibit A.1 in Attachment 3 reflects the recommended modifications. Staff notes that Commissioners Allen and O'Connor voted against the project as they were concerned that the public restroom would result in additional costs to the City and taxpayers over an extended period of time. They also expressed concern that the project did not include amenities that would be used by the broader community, and that land was being re- designated for housing outside of a Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) process. As noted above, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council support the applicant's proposal to construct a restroom, with the understanding that the City Council would be presented with an estimate of the long-term maintenance and operations costs of the restroom. Staff has crafted a condition (subject to revision by the City Council) reflecting this direction from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission also made a minor technical change to the development agreement and added a condition requiring adequate emergency vehicle access to the restroom(s). Detailed Planning Commission discussion and public comments provided at the Planning Commission meeting can be found in the April 12, 2017 meeting minute excerpts, Attachment 12. PUD AND VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FINDINGS Please refer to the attached Planning Commission staff report (pages 28-33 in Attachment 9) for a discussion of the considerations needed to approve the proposed PUD Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Map 8326. PUBLIC NOTICE Notices for this hearing were sent to surrounding property owners and tenants within a 1,000- foot radius of the site in addition to the entire Valley Trails Neighborhood. Staff has provided the location and noticing maps as Exhibit J in Attachment 9 for reference. At the time this report was published, staff has not received public comments as a result of this hearing's notification. Staff has included all public comments received as of the April 12, 2017 Planning Commission meeting as Attachment 11. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT An Initial Study/Negative Declaration was prepared for the proposed project. Based on the Initial Study, the proposed development would not have any adverse effects on the environment. Therefore, staff believes that the Negative Declaration can be issued pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. If the City Council finds that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment, it must adopt a resolution approving the attached Negative Declaration. The Negative Declaration is included in Attachment 1 for the Council's consideration. Page 19 of 20