5a - Laserfiche WebLink

PROS AND CONS FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT Pros Cons Allows appropriate development on a Creates higher demand on City services property zoned for a residential use. including water, sewer, road infrastructure, and other public services and amenities. Furthers the implementation of the Happy Valley Specific Plan. Significant and enhanced landscaping along the project frontage and rear and side yards would soften the appearance and reduce visual impacts of the new home. PUBLIC NOTICE Notice of this application was sent to surrounding property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the site and published in the newspaper. Staff has provided the location and noticing maps as Exhibit D for reference. At the time this report was published, staff had not received any public comments. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project was programmatically reviewed as part of the Happy Valley Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which was certified on June 16, 1998. Pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, no additional environmental review is required for residential projects that are proposed in accordance with a Specific Plan for which CEQA documentation was certified after January 1, 1980. Therefore, no environmental review document accompanies this report. CONCLUSION The project, as conditioned, would be consistent with the semi-rural character of the area and would be in substantial compliance with the Happy Valley Specific Plan and the applicable PUD standards and design guidelines. The home has been designed with traditional architecture that will reflect that of the surrounding area. Staff believes that the house would be attractive and would incorporate rural design elements and materials. Therefore, the project, as conditioned, merits a favorable recommendation by the Commission. Primary Author: Jennifer Hagen, Associate Planner, 925-931-5607 or ihagen(a cityofpleasantonca.gov Reviewed/Approved By: Steve Otto, Senior Planner Ellen Clark, Planning Manager Gerry Beaudin, Community Development Director P18-0269, 1131 Sleepy Head Lane Planning Commission Page 8 of 8 nia's Green Building Standards Code, "CALGreen." ALTERNATIVES As outlined in the above analysis staff believes the design of the home, as proposed and conditioned, would be compatible with the other homes in the vicinity and not create adverse impacts, and recommends the Planning Commission approve the project as proposed and conditioned. However, alternatives to the proposal that could be considered by the Planning Commission include: 1. Denial of all or part of the application. The Commission may deny the entire project; 2. Approval of the Design Review with modifications. The Planning Commission could approve the Design Review of the home with modifications to the architecture, landscaping, or other site improvement changes. Since staff believes the project will not adversely impact any properties or the surrounding area, that the project has been designed to be compatible with the existing homes in the area and conforms to the PUD-31 site development standards and design guidelines, staff recommends that neither of the two project alternatives above be pursued. P18-0269, 1131 Sleepy Head Lane Planning Commission Page 7 of 8