SR 06:210 - Laserfiche WebLink

home and approximately 58 feet from the shared property line between the Rhoades and the Stantons. The impact of the turret's height will therefore be minimal on the Stanton property, Finally, the appellants have raised three concerns that although not particularly under the purview of the Planning Department, were individually addressed in the June 22 ZA hearing that Mr. Stanton did not attend. First is a question whether the builder would have a completion bond. Mr, Robert Sweeney, the contractor, stated that he would, The Stantons also want to know if the remodel time from start to finish can be guaranteed, Mr. Sweeney stated that he could almost guarantee the timing. Staff responds that due to weather and other unforeseen contingencies, no construction time can be guaranteed. It is, however, in the best interest of both the homeowner and the contractor that the ser- vices are completed sooner rather than later. Although this issue is not regulated by the City's Planning Department, at the June 22 hearing, the ZA clearly stated that by limiting the days of external construction to exclude Saturdays, the overall timeframe for project construction would be elongated, Mrs, Stanton stated she understood this and preferred to modify the condition to prohibit external construction on Saturdays. Secondly, the Stantons wish to know if photovoltaic (PV) panels will be installed on the applicants' roof. At the June 22 hearing, Mr, Rhoades stated that he had no plans for the installation of PV panels. Staff notes, however, that the Planning Department does not conduct design review on PV panels that are flat mounted on the roof of a single-family detached house, second unit, patio cover, trellis, and/or carport (including office, com- mercial, industrial, and public and institutional patio covers, trellises, and carports) P.M.C. ~18.20,OlO(D), Finally, the appellants raised concern about water drainage problems that will occur due to the proposed addition. As stated by the applicant, the Rhoades and the appellants, the subject neighborhood has poor drainage. Staff notes, however, that there is no increase in impervious surface due to the project. Therefore it will not impact water drainage on the Stantons' property, In order to address surface water, however, the ZA added a condition to the project approval requiring the applicant to install a drip irrigation system within the four-foot planter strip between the pool and the rear property line before a building final is issued, DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA Per Chapter 18.20 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code the Zoning Administrator must de- termine that the proposed project meets the outlined design criteria to approve the pro- posal. The Zoning Administrator determined that the proposed project meets the outlined design criteria, The design review criteria for this type of project and the associated analysis are as follows: Item 6.d., PAP-97/PADR-I542 Page 70f9 July 26, 2006