Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Hagen said yes as it is zoned for office which allows up to 30 feet high. She added <br />that this proposed project is zoned for multi - family, which can go up to 40 feet high. <br />Chair Allen stated that the staff report also talked about the trees maturing and inquired <br />how old the trees seen from the rear bedroom are and if they could obstruct the current <br />view in ten years. <br />Ms. Hagen replied that the tree on the right of the view is a fairly new, recently - planted <br />Plum tree, and the two on the very left of the view are Heritage trees which could grow <br />taller and which staff would most likely request to be retained with future construction. <br />She indicated that the Plum tree is proposed to be removed as part of this development, <br />which would provide the neighbor with a wider view to the right. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br />Alok Damireddy, Applicant, stated that his team spent six months working with City staff <br />and the neighbors to arrive at multiple plan options, and after four neighborhood <br />meetings and ten revisions, they arrived at a consensus with three full - scale, fine -tuned <br />designs. He added that he also created a public poll so citizens could comment on <br />these plans: there were about 15 respondents, most of whom had previously applied <br />for building permits, and of the 15, 12 liked Option 1; two liked Option 2, and three liked <br />Option 3. He noted that they made every possible effort to make sure they met all the <br />Code requirements and to have a good balance with what they want to have on this <br />site. He then thanked the staff and the neighbors for their cooperation. <br />Regarding the preservation of views, Mr. Damireddy stated that no scenic or view <br />corridor easement exists on the current property, and the neighbors should have <br />reasonable expectations that future construction and landscaping could and would <br />obstruct the views. He added that the Planning Commission has a precedent of <br />approving residential projects where there were view concerns. He stated that he has <br />been working with the neighbors to address all these concerns and come to a <br />consensus. <br />Mr. Damireddy pointed out that the current zoning on the project site allows for four <br />additional units, and they chose to build only three, pretty small in design ranging from <br />697 to 829 square feet. He noted that any further reduction in size would make them <br />too small. He added that they have addressed all of the privacy issues, especially in the <br />north- facing elevations: the window has been minimized, and the structure to the rear <br />of the property has been set back. He requested the Planning Commission to approve <br />one of the options today to avoid further design issues. <br />Commissioner Piper inquired to whom the public poll went. <br />Mr. Damireddy replied that they were Pleasanton residents who were property owners <br />and had applied for building permits over the past two years. He indicated that he <br />pulled their emails from public records and sent them the poll. <br />Commissioner Balch inquired if the respondents were only within a certain area. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 9, 2015 Page 5 of 17 <br />