PC 061406 - Laserfiche WebLink

receive approval for something that would change their surroundings and impact them ~ and the view that they and their neighbors currently have. He added that staff is incorrectly comparing apples to oranges when referring to developments on Foothill Road where the height for asingle-story home is 24 feet. He stated that this observation is not applicable to this project because the Knights' proposal will impact their home by the new ridge elevation, and their view and quality of life will be taken away from them. He noted that his existing view was the selling point for his home and noted that a Pleasanton appraiser had estimated that the addition would decrease his resale value by approximate $30,000, which would make it hazder to sell his home in the future. He noted that the City's goal to "protect and enhance real property values" would benefit only the Knights and at their expense. Mr. Georgatos took exception to the discussion in the staff report that the design criteria related to the preservation of views by residences and that privacy and quality of life as currently designed does impact their home and family. He urged the Planning Commission to uphold his appeal and overturn the Zoning Administrator's decision. Stan Knight, applicant, 779 Mirador Court, stated that he and his wife have lived at this location for the last ten years, and the growth of their family has necessitated more living space. They have spent the past three yeazs searching for a larger home but have been unsuccessful. So they began planning to remodel their home and considered adding a second story, especially since they liked their neighborhood. He indicated that they shared their idea with eight neighbors before initiating the City's review process. Several of the neighbors supported their proposal, and one did not object but expressed initial concerns about construction noise and dust. He continued that the objections of the neighbors to the south along East Angela Street were significantly underestimated, and since the grade of these homes is 12 feet higher than their own, they did not anticipate major concerns. Mr. Knight then discussed the design considerations, indicating that they initially considered single-story expansion options as alower-cost alternation, but they could not find feasible ground-floor layout that would offer the space they needed. They then considered second-story design configurations, taking into account the cost, living space utility, general exterior appeal, and impact to the neighbors. He added that after working with their architect, and reviewing the design criteria with the Zoning Administrator and staff and getting their input, they came up with the current fundamental azchitectural design as the only viable option. He stated that the proposed project conforms to all City zoning standazds with no requested variances. He added that the design of the house has minimized the roof height to 24 feet at the highest point, which is six feet below the allowable limit, and the placement of the second-story windows were reconfigured to increase the number of opaque-glass windows with two other windows blocked by existing trees. Mr. Knight continued that to allow the neighbors and City staff to better assess impacts, story-poles have been installed twice, and extensive and costly sun shadowing study has been undertaken. He added that the vast amount of mature vegetation sun•ounding the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 14, 2006 Page 7 of 18