PC-2026-14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Resolution No. PC-2026-14 Page Two NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the Planning Commission of the City of Pleasanton does resolve, declare, determine, and order the following: Section 1: Prior to making a recommendation on the Project, and at a properly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission reviewed written and oral agenda reports, conducted a public hearing on the Project and took testimony, and received into the record all pertinent documents related to the Project (collectively, the “Record Evidence”). The Planning Commission’s recommendation is based on the Record Evidence, which is incorporated into this Resolution by reference. Section 2: Findings for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15270, which statutorily exempt projects that a public agency intends to deny. Section 3: Findings for Certificate of Appropriateness Denial With respect to the denial of PUD-152, the Planning Commission finds and recommends that the City Council make the following findings as required by Section 18.74.190, subsections (1) - (3), of the PMC: 1. The proposed demolition of a structure would be inappropriate or inconsistent with the purposes of this chapter; or 2. The proposed demolition would have an adverse effect on adjoining property, or on the built context; or 3. The proposed future use and design of the property would be inconsistent with PMC Chapter 18.74 or the adopted guidelines. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed future use and design of the property are inconsistent with Chapter 18.74 and the adopted Downtown design guidelines. The Project does not maintain the commercial or mixed- use character intended for the site, lacks active ground-floor engagement with the public realm, and introduces building form, scale, and orientation that are not consistent with the pedestrian-oriented design and architectural standards required within the Downtown Revitalization District. Accordingly, the criteria for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness are not met. As such, the Planning Commission recommends the City Council determine that this finding cannot be made. The Planning Commission further finds and recommends the City Council determine that the applicant has not established that there is unnecessary hardship in the strict application of PMC Chapter 18.74. Docusign Envelope ID: F7D5AF6D-4DB3-82C5-832D-A68C36612ADA