PC-2026-14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Resolution No. PC-2026-14 Page Five project would avoid potential erosion, surface runoff impacts, or localized flooding conditions. As such, the Planning Commission finds and recommends the City Council determine that this finding cannot be made. 5. Whether streets, buildings, and other manmade structures have been designed and located in such a manner to complement the natural terrain and landscape. The proposed development plan includes a building layout and site design that is primarily driven by building mass rather than a cohesive visual relationship with the surrounding environment. The project emphasizes large building massing with limited articulation and minimal integration of landscaping into the architectural design. The building’s orientation—featuring a rear-facing elevation along Old Bernal Avenue and a lack of a street-facing primary entrance—fails to integrate with the established streetscape and surrounding landscape context. As such, the Planning Commission finds and recommends the City Council determine that this finding cannot be made. 6. Whether adequate public safety measures have been incorporated into the design or the proposed development plan. The proposed development plan does not demonstrate that adequate public safety measures have been incorporated into the design. The project’s site layout and circulation pattern do not provide clear, safe, and intuitive pedestrian pathways from the public right-of-way to individual residential unit entrances, resulting in potential conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles, particularly given the reliance on driveway access for primary entry points. The absence of a street-facing primary entrance along Old Bernal Avenue reduces natural surveillance and “eyes on the street,” which are key elements of passive public safety. In addition, inconsistencies in the submitted plans regarding unit access, bicycle facilities, refuse location, and utility design prevent a full evaluation of operational safety and emergency access considerations. Furthermore, incomplete information regarding fencing and gate design limits the ability to confirm that the project provides adequate visibility, access control, and safety features throughout the site. Collectively, these deficiencies indicate that the development plan does not sufficiently incorporate public safety measures into its design. As such, the Planning Commission finds and recommends the City Council determine that this finding cannot be made. 7. Whether the proposed development plan conforms to the purposes of the PUD district. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed development plan does not conform to the purposes of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) District. The PUD District is intended to promote well-planned projects that achieve high- quality design, superior site planning, and compatibility with surrounding uses Docusign Envelope ID: F7D5AF6D-4DB3-82C5-832D-A68C36612ADA