PC 032515 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner O'Connor added that part of this can also be how close one is to the building: the further back one is, the more visible the windows and even the chimney would be. Commissioner Balch commented that this is a practical way of bringing the model and being able to turn it around far enough. Chair Allen stated that for clarification, if she were to compare the left elevation of the Planning Commission's copy of the layout with this rendering, one would not be seeing that same perspective and they are views from different angles; otherwise, the rotunda and the chimney would be visible, and it would look very different. Mr. Landolf agreed. He noted that elevations cannot be seen totally except for the architectural drawing. Chair Allen disclosed that she visited the site, talked to Mr. Monzo as well, and saw the photos discussed. She asked Mr. Landolf if there is anything they can do to help with the neighbor's concern in terms of a slightly alternative design or shift that might be really creative. Mr. Landolf stated that they designed a house for Mr. Haddad that he envisioned and wants. He indicated that he does not see a compromise, but they made changes to the house the applicant initially wanted to get this to where it was acceptable not only to the HOA but to Planning staff. He added that short of doing massive changes to the floor plan, there is literally no way to do that other than to move the house. Commissioner O'Connor inquired if the proposed home followed the original design of the original 8,000- square foot home, a design that the City never saw. Mr. Landolf stated that it is pretty similar. He added that they took a lot of square footage out of the house. Chair Allen asked Mr. Landolf what the implications would be if the Commission were not to approve the increase in grading and he needed to stay at 40 percent. Mr. Landolf explained that, first of all, it was their understanding with Ms. Wallis that some of the low -level grading would not be counted as grading, in which case they would currently meet that 40- percent compliance as is; however, if that did not work out and they were forced to meet the 40 percent including every bit of grading being done, they would have to modify the back and not do a lot of the backyard landscaping space. He noted that in theory, the 40- percent grading is great, but that was 30 years ago. He further noted that it is difficult today to conform to the 40 percent because bigger homes are being built; this retention area is taking up part of the grading allotment; people want to have a backyard; the driveway's bigger with a three - four -car garage; and all this requires grading. Chair Allen inquired if the house would not change then, but the landscaping would Mr. Landolf said yes, at this point. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 25, 2015 Page 7 of 27