PC 10/23/96 - Laserfiche WebLink

. . relocate elsewhere with her horse. She would not attempt this subdivision if there were not the various lot sizes in the neighborhood. She is opposed to the height restrictions for the home on Lot 2. She feels everyone has lost views with the residential development in the area. She would like the Commission to strilce the height restrictions from this application. She would agree to follow the R-I-40,OOO design guidelines in effect whenever a house is constructed on this lot. Commissioner Wright inquired of the applicant if she approves of all the conditions of the staff report other than Conditions 3 band 3c. Ms. Montgomery concurred that she only requests these conditions be struck from the application. Chair Barker inquired if the horse must be moved only when construction is started on Lot 2. Ms. Montgomery advised that she is required to move the horse at the time of recording the lot subdivision; however, she has already moved her horse to another location. Ron Archer, 4133 Mohr Ave., Suite E, is an engineerrepresenting Ms. Montgomery. He stated that Ms. Montgomery raised no objections to the two-story houses of the Pinn development blocking her view of Mt. Diablo. He feels Mr. Deri's view will not be blocked to a great degree. He feels the lot should be split in half and not skew Lot 2 with pie-shaped restrictions. He noted that there is only one person making any complaints against this application, even after notifications being sent within a 1,000 foot radius. Mr. Archer feels the lot should be zoned as R-I-40,OOO. Jeff Bickley, 3757 Angus Way, lives directly behind Ms. Montgomery's existing home. He stated she has been very cooperative in keeping her horse well maintained, however, there has been an odor at times. He supports the subdivision because the horse will not become an issue. He feels the additional restrictions may hamper Ms. Montgomery's ability to sell the lot which would mean the horse would continue to stay. Mr. Bickley also noted that the application has no landscaping restrictions, and landscaping could block the viewshed more than would a house. Mr. Bickley is in favor of the development and hopes Ms. Montgomery will be able to move forward with the sale of her lots. In response to Chair Barker, Mr. Bickley stated he was not told that this lot would never be developed when he purchased his lot in the Pinn development. Kim Hayden, 3763 Angus Way, lives directly behind Ms. Montgomery, and she supports the subdivision of this lot. She has a concern that the barn and outbuildings will not be removed when the horse goes away. This is contradicted in the staff report. Dennis Struecker, 3763 Angus Way, asked if the accessory buildings would stay or be removed. Chair Barker feels they will stay as nonconforming structures. Mr. Iserson advised the buildings on l..ct 2 would be removed, but those on Lot 1 would stay as nonconforming structures. Mr. Struecker advised that he is still not clear which structures would be removed. Mr. Iserson advised that the drawing indicates the garage as being a barn when, in fact, it is a garage/carport structure. . AI Weimken P.O. Box 969, Pleasanton, presented overheads of the Trenery Drive area. He described his past involvement in developing the Trenery Drive area and zoning the area as LDR Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 October 23, 1996