PC 08/28/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

how a 23 ft. high and 30 ft. wide structure would appear, but he felt from his view it would be very obtrusive. He felt the majority of his view would be wiped out. The Board is also concerned what would happen to the RV structure should Mr. Griffen move. He thought that a row of trees to block the view of the proposed dwelling could be helpful. He agreed with Commissioner Wright's suggestion that the living quarters and RV storage could be workable. Commissioner Hovingh asked Mr. Sugasawara what the Homeowners' Association position was in comparison to his own. Mr. Sugasawara replied that the Association was opposed to the height on Plan C and the pitch of the roof. They were opposed to Plan D in that it took away the openness of the lot. The Association is opposed to a detached "granny" flat because they feel this would open it up for rental to the general public. Commissioner Michelotti explained that "granny" flats in Pleasanton do not necessarily have to be rented to "granny", but certain regulations in regard to those units do appiy. Further discussion ensued as to what Mr. Sevisivara could see of the applicant's home from his location. In response to Commissioner Hovingh's question, Mr. Sevisivara stated that his personal preference would be for a one story structure. If Plan C were used, trees planted on the south side would then probably block most of the view of the applicant's garage door. ~ Paul Mohenburg, 15 Grey Eagle Court, said his house is located east of Mr. Griffen's home. He indicated that he was shocked by the possibility of a "granny" flat and felt that a separate unit would set the precedent for many more such homes in their area. He was also concerned about what would happen should the Griffens move. At present, he views the top of the RV from his home and felt that the proposed enclosed structure was a "monster". He was opposed to having it included in the carport plan; he did not see the logic of having it wheelchair accessible. He did not object to having a single story structure attached to the house if it is kept low and discreetly to the back of the yard. Chairman Mahern asked Mr. Mohenburg the reason for his objection to having two separate units. Mr. Mohenburg said he felt the proposed units would not meet architectural standards. He added that the CC&R's say RV's and boats are not to be seen by the public. The RV is not stored legally at this point. Mr. Griffen returned to the podium. In response to a comment, he said that the plan for separate units have a roofline that matches the existing house. He was opposed to moving the "granny" unit around to the back because the address would be changed. Commissioner Hovingh asked Mr. Griffen how he felt about planting a row of trees on Mr. Sevisivara's property to shield the view. Mr. Griffen said he would do that, if necessary. ~ Minutes Planning COmmission August 28, 1991 Page 5 I. .