CCMIN050598 - Laserfiche WebLink

4500 square footage was determined. She said the original PUD was approved in February 1991. She recapped the minutes from the meeting when the project was approved, setting the maximum at 4500 square feet. She did not understand how this project could even be considered. The buyer had the option to buy a lot on the tier above, where more square footage would have been allowed and the buyer knew the restriction on the lower tier was 4500 square feet. She said this Council voted in February 1997 not to increase the square footage. She felt if the additional square footage was approved the rest of the houses would also want additional square footage. Ms. Dennis said there was no EIR on this project and she wished the project's visualization had been better. She visualized something different than what was there presently. In February 1997 she was focusing on an endangered species. She said not much time was spent on the custom home lots except for the aligning of Serenity Drive to Muirwood. Ms. Ayala was trying to understand how the views of the Council could change from what was voted on previously. She felt it was a disservice to the staff who in letter after letter told the architect that this would not be approved by Council. She understood this is a controversial project, but the buyer could have bought a lot on the second tier if he wanted to build a bigger house. Mayor Tarver wanted to move the garage so it would be less visible and put a PUD modification restriction on garages in the future. Ms. Michelotti asked how many lots were expected to be developed in the area. Mr. Swift said this is a major modification for lot 92. As indicated in the staff report there are two processes to go through. The first is the PUD modification approval and the second is the design review process for the house. Modifications to the house design should be done through the design review process. Should Council wish to add new PUD conditions that would apply to future lots, Council would need to initiate those changes. Ms. Michelotti thought the architect was in agreement with the color going back to the modified color palette. She asked if putting restrictions on the garage size would have to come back as a future modification to include the rest of the lots? Mr. Swift understood Councilmember Dennis's remarks as being limited to lot 92. Ms. Dennis understood Ms. Ayala's concerns, but also wanted to keep in mind the goal of limiting the square footage. She felt if the roof line were lowered, it would mitigate the visibility of the house and the square footage could then be added horizontally. She did not agree with moving the garage back. Pleasanton City Council 9 05/05198 Minutes