PC 110911 - Laserfiche WebLink

function of the house for being too massive for its size at a FAR of 66 percent and is further proof that this project is too much house on too small of a lot. She added that the lot is so small and narrow that there is no room on the side to park a car, the house being 30 feet wide and the lot being only 35 feet wide. She indicated that staff states that granting the variances will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zoning district; however, she finds that it is a special privilege because other tandem parking situations exist only on lots of older homes, and none have been granted to new homes. She added that staff also states that the tandem parking would not pose a traffic obstruction, but she believes it would because they have a small garage situated so close to the sidewalk and to the property line that their current neighbor cannot see what is coming up the street from his right and is careful not to hit pedestrians when he backs out. She noted that there is a single renter at the house at this time, but there could be at least two people driving cars, and the situation could be more dangerous than it is now. Finally, she stated that the street space in front of the existing cottage has space for only one vehicle, but it is very steep. She noted that previous renters and their visitors rarely parked there and have consistently parked next to their house where the ground is flatter. She indicated that with two to three drivers in the household, there would be more need to park next to their house, and this is a problem for them because this is where they put their garbage and recycling cans, in addition to the already frequent parking that occurs then, including those from Baptist church members who come to services, farmers market shoppers, Wheels buses, delivery trucks, and especially workers and visitors to the Generations HealthCare across the street. She noted that this would make an already over-crowded street worse and would create more difficulty with their existing parking situation and that of their visitors. She urged the Commission to deny the application. Commissioner Olson disclosed that the Shapiros are personal friends of his. Joyce Shapiro stated that she has lived in Pleasanton since 1966 and has driven First Street, Second Street, Neal Street, and the surrounding area thousands of times. She indicated that people should feel fortunate that this area continues to be improved and modified to maintain its uniqueness and charm. She noted that there are many kinds of lot configurations with an assortment of house designs, and she found it interesting that each design seems to get along and support one another far better than the occupants of those homes. She stated that she is not sure of the definition of a historic or heritage area and wondered if it is when the house was built, because of who lived there, or because of a particular design. She stated that she is sure that everyone has a different opinion of this subject, and she thinks it is unfortunate that a committee of eight or twelve has become the Pleasanton Heritage Association and seems to think they can control Pleasanton with their opinion. Ms. Shapiro stated that she was not sure what the Oxsens Sears Kit house has to do ; she was not aware that this type of home was part of the City and believes that the home was placed on a remnant lot left from Peters Avenue construction. She added that the lot has a peculiar alignment with the adjoining lot on PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 9, 2011 Page 20 of 29