My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
24 ATTACHMENT 4
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
060215
>
24 ATTACHMENT 4
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 12:04:08 PM
Creation date
5/28/2015 8:06:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/2/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
24 ATTACHMENT 4
Document Relationships
24
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2015\060215
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
the neighbor's concern in terms of a slightly alternative design or shift that might be <br /> really creative. <br /> Mr. Landolf stated that they designed a house for Mr. Haddad that he envisioned and <br /> wants. He indicated that he does not see a compromise, but they made changes to the <br /> house the applicant initially wanted to get this to where it was acceptable not only to the <br /> HOA but to Planning staff. He added that short of doing massive changes to the floor <br /> plan, there is literally no way to do that other than to move the house. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor inquired if the proposed home followed the original design of <br /> the original 8,000-square foot home, a design that the City never saw. <br /> Mr. Landolf stated that it is pretty similar. He added that they took a lot of square <br /> footage out of the house. <br /> Chair Allen asked Mr. Landolf what the implications would be if the Commission were <br /> not to approve the increase in grading and he needed to stay at 40 percent. <br /> Mr. Landolf explained that, first of all, it was their understanding with Ms. Wallis that <br /> some of the low-level grading would not be counted as grading, in which case they <br /> would currently meet that 40-percent compliance as is; however, if that did not work out <br /> and they were forced to meet the 40 percent including every bit of grading being done, <br /> they would have to modify the back and not do a lot of the backyard landscaping space. <br /> He noted that in theory, the 40-percent grading is great, but that was 30 years ago. He <br /> further noted that it is difficult today to conform to the 40 percent because bigger homes <br /> are being built; this retention area is taking up part of the grading allotment; people want <br /> to have a backyard; the driveway's bigger with a three-four-car garage; and all this <br /> requires grading. <br /> Chair Allen inquired if the house would not change then, but the landscaping would. <br /> Mr. Landolf said yes, at this point. <br /> Commissioner Piper commented that she wished there were more examples of grading <br /> from other homes in the area because it sounds like a good majority of them are over <br /> 40 percent. <br /> Referring to the aerial photo of Golden Eagle Farm, Mr. Landolf noted that if the house <br /> and the driveway were removed, the grass that looks like landscaped area is a graded <br /> area, and a good portion is probably over the 40-percent grading limit. He stated that <br /> he does not know the mechanics of how that actually happens, but it seems like that is <br /> what happened. <br /> Commissioner Nagler inquired, assuming the grading is allowed, what the impact on the <br /> backyard and the rest of the property would be if the house were rotated. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, March 25, 2015 Page 5 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.