06 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

future work on the house will require either a tear down or a retrofit as the existing foundation will not be adequate for sheer walls and the home will not meet current codes. Jerry Hodnefield, Downtown property owner, stated that he has walked the property, taken photographs, examined visual aspects, reviewed the proposed development plan, studied the required variances and recommendations of staff, and read comments submitted by the PHA. He indicated that he believes the concern about massing is strange since the property is already overwhelmed on both sides by two-story buildings. He noted that the property can hardly be seen from the street and, unless the building has some historic significance, he sees no need to require its retention. He pointed out that variances have been granted throughout the Downtown community, and he thinks the proposal will be a nice addition to the area as it will reflect the character of the neighborhood. He indicated that he supported renovation of older homes, and noting that the applicants will most likely spend about $500,000 to build the home, he cited the employment and contribution to the City's tax base the project creates. Linda Garbarino, PHA President and Downtown property owner, asked the Planning Commission to look at the big picture which includes an entire historic neighborhood. She stated that if homes are demolished and new structures are built that do not fit, the neighborhood would be changed forever. She indicated that she finds the proposed home design beautiful; however, she believed that this proposal might work only on a larger lot with an appropriate scale, bulk, and mass. She noted that the lot is tiny, the floor area ratio (FAR) is over 70 percent, and the height and wedged-in look will exacerbate the process of trying to make the house fit on the lot. She added that the house as proposed will overlook neighbors' yards, compromise privacy, and cast shadows, and suggested a cottage with a more appropriate mass and scale. Brian Bourg, Downtown property owner, speaking as one of the residents most affected by this proposal, briefly described the variances for his home referred to by Mr. Huff and approved by staff when he remodeled their garage with bedrooms above. He expressed concerns with the Cunninghams' proposal, which would demolish the quaint, existing 480-square-foot cottage that currently provides a much-needed unit of affordable housing and place a 25-foot tall, 1,862-square-foot home right next to the existing 1,778-square-foot home, which is the old Hall home, one of the most historic homes in the City of Pleasanton. He stated that Mr. Huffs plans contend that the land is non-conforming and is big enough, even with the two homes on it, to fall under the 40 percent FAR. He added that if the applicant is allowed to proceed as planned, the historic home at 215 Neal Street would have an even larger home squeezed in right next to it. Mr. Bourg stated that technically, the two homes on one lot would have an FAR of less that 40 percent, but the real purpose of the FAR is to speak to how aesthetically a home looks as it sits on the land and how it blends in with surrounding homes. He noted that in this case, the two closest residences are two historic homes that were given plaques and recognized as heritage sites by the City of Pleasanton at the nation's bicentennial year of 1976 and listed in the Downtown Specific Plan as historic resources and in the EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, APRIL 13, 2011 Page 3 of 15