Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Dolan said staff does make assumptions on what will be built on the lots, which do have <br /> slopes. He said it is a challenge to do a visual simulation for a house that is yet to be designed. <br /> In terms of what the heights would be, the architect shared that he did not assume any height <br /> limitation, but just his impression on what type of home would work on each lot. The slopes did <br /> naturally restrict the size of the homes, and very few approached the maximum square footage <br /> in the approval documents. <br /> Councilmember McGovern said she would like Council to consider sending the houses back to <br /> the Planning Commission for review. There are different size building envelopes, very steep <br /> slopes, she has no idea what the grading plan is, no idea how large each house will be, and she <br /> does not know what each design will look like. Also, homes are currently proposed to be <br /> reviewed by the Zoning Administrator. To her, the homes are on very unique lots with unique <br /> sites, and she would ask that because she cannot see what would be approved, she asked to <br /> send each house back to the Planning Commission, have them review it and determine whether <br /> the homes fit on the property, and she would feel comfortable approving it. Mr. Fialho suggested <br /> Councilmember McGovern add Planning Commission review and approval of each home site as <br /> a condition of approval. <br /> Councilmember Sullivan said he has similar concerns, especially on the West Foothill Road <br /> Overlay District. He walked up on the property, looked where Lots 1 and 2 homes would be, and <br /> he thinks the houses will be very visible and he does not think the photo montages are accurate, <br /> as the homes are 5,000 square feet and it is unknown as to how high they are. Also, where the <br /> photos are taken from are not the most visible locations, especially for lots 3 and 4. The most <br /> visible for 3 and 4 is at the faculty entrance to Foothill High School. There are no trees, it is a <br /> straight shot, and the power lines runs through the two lots up the hill. He also noted homes <br /> could be up to 9,200 square feet if the garages were included. <br /> Regarding the 30 foot height required in the West Foothill Road Guidelines, when he was on the <br /> Planning Commission, they spent a lot of time looking at them through several meetings about <br /> whether guidelines make sense. They received public feedback and one important issue was <br /> the 30 foot height limit. For the City to now change this to 40 feet and have the houses step up <br /> the hill very visible is not a good precedent. The guidelines have been important in the City for a <br /> long time. The Pleasanton Ridge and those homes along Foothill Road have been very <br /> important for a long time as to how houses get built there. He questioned how to make a 9,000 <br /> square foot house on excess of a 30% slope, and maybe the answer is that it is too big. <br /> Councilmember Sullivan questioned if the Fish and Wildlife Service have to grant permits in the <br /> process, and Mr. Dolan said they and other federal agencies have no permitting authority in this <br /> area because the City is not moving the creek. <br /> Councilmember Sullivan said he still thought this was a pretty strong statement not to further <br /> investigate. He questioned why houses could not be built in the flatlands adjacent to where <br /> Lemoine Ranch is in a similar manner. Mr. Dolan said there are several geotechnical issues <br /> along Foothill; one is a fault that runs diagonally along the front. There are also several <br /> landslides, and he presented a map of the building pads originally proposed in the 6 lot <br /> proposal, areas determined to have geologic issues, and areas of the landslide in the corridor <br /> which has been more precisely mapped. He said there is a small area away from the fault line <br /> and outside of the landslide area, where 1 or 2 lots could fit. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 13 of 16 June1, 2010 <br />