11 - Laserfiche WebLink

As described above, the Planning Commission at the hearing on August 23, 2017, found that the project would not comply with Design Review criteria Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7, as listed above. PUBLIC NOTICE Notices for this hearing were sent to surrounding property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the site for the City Council hearing. Staff has provided the location and noticing map as Attachments 1.A-10 or 1.E for reference. All prior public comments can be reviewed in Attachment 4. At the time this report was published, staff had not received any new public comments. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project is categorically exempt (Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities) from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, no environmental document accompanies this report. CONCLUSION Staff believes the Planning Commission action to deny the project as currently proposed is appropriate based on the Planning Commission's assessment of the project in the context of the Design Review criteria listed under Section 18.20 (Design Review) of the PMC. In particular, the proposed residence would be one of the largest on the street and out-of-scale with its surroundings. The location of the second story addition would add to the perceived massing of the project, compounding design concerns with the size of the proposed residence. Furthermore, the submitted plans lack detail about materials and finishes that would be necessary to ensure a high-quality design that is compatible with surrounding buildings. Staff therefore recommends that the City Council deny the appeal. Submitted by: Approved by: /U' d(A• „, Gerry Beaudin 1 Nelson Fialho Director of Community City Manager Development Page 10 of 11