|
<br />EXIIIBIT
<br />
<br />e
<br />\';1
<br />
<br />DRAFT
<br />
<br />PAP-97, Steve and Carol Stanton, ADDellants (PADR-1542, Robert Sweenev Construction,
<br />for Jim Rhoades)
<br />Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's approval of an application for administrative design
<br />review approval to construct an approximately 1,224-square-foot second-floor addition and
<br />an approximately 120-square-foot first-floor addition to the front of the existing residenee
<br />located at 3227 Anastaeia Court.
<br />
<br />Ms, Mendez presented the staff report, stating that the project was an appeal of a Zoning
<br />Administrator's approval of an approximately 1,224-square-foot second-floor addition and an
<br />approximately 120-square-foot first-floor addition to the front of the applicant's property located
<br />at 3227 Anastacia Court, She noted that the project meets all the required setbacks, height, and
<br />floor area ratio, as well as the nine design criteria outlined in Chapter 18,20 of the Pleasanton
<br />Municipal Code, She stated that a Zoning Administrator hearing was held on June 22, 2006, at
<br />which the Zoning Administrator approved the project, which was subsequently appealed by
<br />Mr. and Mrs, Stanton, property owners to the rear (east) of the subject site,
<br />
<br />Ms, Mendez noted that the appellants' concerns are addressed in the staff report and the staff
<br />memo that was previously e-mailed to the Commissioners and the Stantons, She added that the
<br />Stantons indicated that staff did not fully comprehend the second item on the memo regarding
<br />the discrepancy between the square footage of living area stated on first plan sheet and those
<br />stated at the bottom of pages A-2, A-3, and A-4. Ms, Mendez continued that Mr. Robert
<br />Sweeney, general contractor for the applicants, explained that the figures were a function of the
<br />computer program and that the calculation on page A-I are accurate and consistent with County
<br />records, Ms. Mendez indicated that Mr. Sweeney was present to answer questions on the
<br />discrepancy,
<br />
<br />Ms, Mendez stated that the proposed project meets all the required site development standards
<br />for the zoning district and that the design of the addition is attractive and fits well in the
<br />neighborhood of one- and two-story homes with varied architectural designs, She added that the
<br />Zoning Administrator had added conditions to the project that would mitigate the issues raised
<br />by the appellants and recommended that the Commission deny the appeal, thereby upholding the
<br />Zoning Administrator's decision approving the project.
<br />
<br />Commissioner Fox inquired if the appellants own the property but do not live there, Ms, Mendez
<br />said yes, She stated that the house is being rented out.
<br />
<br />Commissioner Fox further inquired if the renters had weighed in on the project. Ms, Mendez
<br />replied that the renter first notified the appellants and was concerned about the project and the
<br />effects of noise and dust.
<br />
<br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
<br />
<br />Steve and Carol Stanton, 6882 Via Quito, appellants, are the owners of the home at 3116 Joanne
<br />Circle located directly behind the proposed project. Mr, Stanton presented overhead pictures of
<br />their house, identifying the bedroom, the kitchen, dining room, and family room, which are
<br />located directly across the proposed two-story additions with large windows and the large
<br />
<br />DRAFT EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 26, 2006
<br />
<br />Page 1 of 4
<br />
|