Laserfiche WebLink
areas and buildings. Staff has attempted to impose reasonable conditions to mitigate <br />neighborhood impacts relative to these criteria. <br />The administrative design review process is intended to invite neighborhood participation and <br />input with the goal of finding an acceptable resolution to all parties; unfortunately, the process <br />does not always result in complete accord. In this case, staff believes that the recommended <br />conditions of approval strike a balance between the applicants' desire to construct the second <br />unit and the neighbors' desires to preserve their privacy and views. <br />Regarding the PUD modification, staff believes that the proposed grading, retaining walls, and <br />tree relocation would not adversely impact the adjacent neighbors and is acceptable. In addition, <br />staff is not aware of any neighborhood opposition to the PUD modification. <br />IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br />Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the appeal and approve Case PADR- <br />1762, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit C. In addition, staff recommends that the <br />Commission adopt a resolution recommending approval of Case PUD-99-9-2M to the City <br />Council, subject to the conditions shown in Exhibit "D." <br />For comments or questions concerning this project, please call.• Steve Otto, Associate Planner (phone: 931-5608 <br />or email: sotto a~ci. Pleasanton. ca. t~s) <br />PAP-117 <br />Planning Commission <br />Page 14 of 19 <br />