PC 062806 - Laserfiche WebLink

Dennis Georgatos, appellant, noted that after staff suggested mediation, he had been hopeful that a mutual compromise could be reached. He received an email from Ms. Amos that staff would contact all parties regarding how the mediation would proceed. He received a communication from Ms. Decker that the City could not fund its shaze of the costs. He did not believe that City staff informed the other parties, including Mrs. Wensel, Mr. Bennett, and Mr. Imperiale, whether they would be willing to beaz a greater shaze of the 25-percent mediation costs they had agreed to cover. They were informed that the item would be placed on the agenda for a decision. He noted that they are not blocking the Knights from remodeling their home but wished it to be modified so it would not block their view and encroach on their privacy. He took exception to the Commissioners' comments that it would be insane for them not to want aseven-foot fence. He believed that aseven-foot fence would create aboxed-in environment for them. Except for the Zoning Administrator'sreguirement of transom windows in the master bedroom and two trees in the back yard, there was a minimum of concessions that the Knights had made and they expected the City to require more. He noted that the Knights have never offered to downsize their expansion. He believed that expansion in that location was out of proportion for the neighborhood. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Pearce regazding whether he would be amenable to the selection of Jerry Iserson to mediate this matter, Mr. Georgatos noted that he had just learned of this option. He believed the City had become an advocate for this project and had a vested interest in its approval, and, therefore, he would prefer an independent mediator. ~~ Stan Knight, applicant, noted that the suggestion to use transom windows and remove the other windows would not be allowed due to legal egress issues; lazger windows must be placed somewhere to meet Code standazds. He noted that for most new homes in Pleasanton, 3,000 squaze feet would be considered less than standazd and emphasized that their design did not exceed the City's allowable footprint standazds. He did not believe the residents who enjoyed an open view when their bought their homes were entitled to that same view in perpetuity. Tn response to an inquiry by Commissioner Pearce regazding whether he would be amenable to Mr. Iserson or a former Planning Commissioner acting in a volunteer capacity to mediate this issue, Mr. Knight replied that he had no problem with that. He was concerned about the length of time the mediation process may add to his project timeline and would be willing to work with the City. He noted that he would like to keep the window on the west side of the home (facing the Bennett residence) and that it met the egress requirements of three-by-four feet with a sill height of 42 inches from the ground. Peter Shutts, project architect, noted that all habitable rooms must have 20 percent of the room in light, and 10 percent of the room in ventilation. Commissioner Blank requested clarification and asked if staff had investigated Building ('~ Code requirements relating to window size. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 28, 2006 Page 7 of 26