20 - Laserfiche WebLink

ALTERNATIVES As noted, it is staffs recommendation that the Planning Commission approve the CUP and Design Review, subject to the draft Conditions of Approval. However, should the Planning Commission determine that the Findings or Design Criteria cannot be made based on the current version of the project and conditions, the Commission can pursue one of the following alternatives: 1. Direct further modifications to the project, and/or further conditions of approval, such as further limitations on the operation of the facilities or modifications to the site plan to address potential operations issues. If modifications or new conditions are extensive, they may need to be brought back to the Planning Commission for review at a continued public hearing; or 2. Deny the Use Permit and Design Review applications. If the Planning Commission pursues this alternative, the applicant would be required to submit new applications, reflecting a substantially modified project design. Since a resolution for denial has not been prepared, if the Planning Commission selects this alternative, staff would recommend that the item be brought back to the Commission at a future date with a resolution that includes findings for denial. PUBLIC NOTICE Notices regarding this item were mailed to the surrounding property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the subject site. A map showing the noticing area is attached to this report. The public notice was also published in The Valley Times. At time this report was published, staff received emails in support of the applications, and they are attached to the staff report as Exhibit G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15301, Existing Facilities, Class 1. Therefore, no environmental document accompanies this report. CONCLUSION Staff believes that the required CUP findings and DR criteria for the project can be met if the project is approved as conditioned. Conditions of Approval have been drafted, which will ensure that the safety and general welfare of the surrounding area is maintained. Staff believes that the proposed uses and site modifications would provide a service to the community and that the proposed location is appropriate. Primary Author: Jenny Soo, Associate Planner, 925-931-5615 or isoo(a�cityofpleasantonca.gov Reviewed/Approved By: Steve Otto, Senior Planner Ellen Clark, Planning Manager Julie Harryman, Assistant City Attorney Dan Sodergren, City Attorney Gerry Beaudin, Director of Community Development Director P16-0288 and P16-1833; 3370 Hopyard Road Planning Commission Page 18 of 18