15 ATTACHMENT 4 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Allen agreed with Commissioner Balch. She noted that the applicant moved the house as far back on the envelope as he could, and if the house is a nice design, the applicant deserves to build it. She pointed out that it is the appropriate size and meets the criteria. She added that she wished there was a win-win, but she does not see how the house could be shifted or rotated and still preserve the backyard and the design, and be built with the same cost that would be expected based on buying a house with that envelope. Commissioner O'Connor stated that the previous comments are appropriate because there are building envelopes here and everyone knows what those are going in. He noted that they may not know exactly what the style of house is going to look like in that building envelope, but at least they know where it is and how far forward and back they are going to be. He added that it could potentially block some viewscape, but when lots do not have a view easement, there could sometimes be a lot of contention. Commissioner Nagler stated that he is obviously going to vote "no" not because he is opposed to the construction of the house. He noted that it is a terrific house, it is totally appropriate to the neighborhood, the applicant has done a great job of designing it, and there has been a lot of work to try and satisfy the various comments from the neighbors; however, it is possible to rotate the house within the envelope, and that is a compromise and a discussion the Commission has not had. Commissioner Balch stated that rotating within the envelope is something he always looks at, and if the lower right corner of the house were moved forward, the house could basically be rotated but that does not gain a view. He indicated that referring back to the slides, it was the pitch of the roof that was basically straight on Mt. Diablo, and rotating the pitch of the roof forward just a bit will provide a view of Mt. Diablo from the back side, but the front side is going to be even more obtrusive. Commissioner Piper stated that to rotate the house, it would have to be pulled forward to fit within that envelope, and the view would be more obstructive. Commissioner Balch explained that it would basically pivot on the back left corner, instead of how Mr. Monzo had proposed which would basically be pivoting back on the upper right corner, and that does not accomplish what the Monzos want. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Allen, Balch, O'Connor, and Piper NOES: Commissioner Nagler ABSTAIN: None RECUSED: None ABSENT:Commissioner Ritter Resolution No. PC-2015-05 approving Case P14-1186 was entered and adopted as motioned. EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, March 25, 2015 Page 11 of 12