PC 061103 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr_ Frank Auf der Maur, Jr_, project architect, 148 Spring Street, displayed elevation boards, and described the site plans and floor plans_ He noted that hipping the roof would reduce the impact of the previous roof design_ He noted that three revisions had been made to get to the final design. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Arkin whether the massing of the south elevation could be broken up, Mr. Auf Der Maur replied that faux trim could be applied_ He noted that they had been asked to reduce the size of the windows on that side to reduce the privacy impact_ He noted that lattices, landscaping, and other features could be considered_ He noted that he could work with staff on that item_ In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Maas, Mr_ Auf Der Maur confirmed that he had designed basements in Pleasanton. He noted that a swimming pool was the same depth as a basement_ Chairperson Arkin noted that he did not have a soils report done when he built his swimming pool Mr_ Auf Der Maur advised that if ground water was detected during excavation, a soils expert would be brought in to determine what should be done. He had never encountered ground water in Pleasanton excavations_ Mr_ Iserson advised that the Building Department requested a soils report if the basement were built; otherwise, it would probably be waived_ He assured the Commission that the Building Official would not ask for the soils report if he did not believe it was necessary. Joyce and Bob Diaz, 4769 Peaceful Lane, spoke in opposition to this project. Mrs_ Diaz did not believe that the addition needed to be as massive. She believed the proposed addition would negatively impact their views, light, air, and open space. She inquired how the General Plan's stated objectives of light, air, and open space conformed with this application. She noted that because the wall would be 20 feet closer to their view, it would appear to be more massive. She believed that the applicants' citation of similar additions in Pleasanton were erroneous, based on the Assessors' records. Mrs_ Diaz was sorry that the applicants believed their home was too small for their needs, but did not believe that they should impact the neighbors to correct that condition. She requested that the Planning Commission deny the application, or require that it be scaled back. Mr. Wayne Couto, 302 Kottinger Drive, noted that he read about this application in the newspaper, and spoke in opposition to this item. He was surprised at size of the addition, and added that he lives in a 1,300 square foot one story home. He questioned whether the applicants needed a 3,500 square foot home, which amounted to 900 square feet for each family member; he believed that was an excessive amount of square footage. He recalled Chairperson Arkin's statement that the Plan.iiing Commission's charge was to protect the greater good of the community, and did not wish to see all the homes in Pleasanton to be PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 11, 2003 Page 8