CCMIN020497 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Tarver commented that if a house is built in a valley, height is not an issue. The higher the elevation, the more visible the house becomes and the height of the house is then an issue. Ms. Ayala believed the Foothill Overlay was established to limit the height of houses and asked why. Mr. Swift explained several two story houses had been built which caused the public to demand that the Planning Commission study the area and establish standards to discourage future construction of such houses. Mayor Tarver declared the public hearing open. David Martinez, 2524 Dos Rios Drive, San Ramon, co-applicant for the major modification, indicated he was attracted to Pleasanton because of the natural setting and beauty of the hills. As discussed by Dr. McGinnis, they have tried to preserve that. He asked for Council approval so they could go ahead with the project. Cathy Merrill, Merrill and Befu, 249 Front Street, San Francisco, architects and planners for the project, briefly elaborated on the requests for broadening the allowed colors and further indicated the method of calculating the height of a house was based on past practice and that did not work in this area. She explained how the calculations were done and pointed out the flaws of the thirty foot limit when put into practice. She described the effects on cul de sac lots and indicated the need for flexibility in unique sites. She believed there should be a thirty foot sliding scale and include allowance for foundations. She asked that Council allow two feet for the foundation to be covered in an overall forty foot limit. (She presented a handout illustrating various house heights.) The second tier of units is below grade and she felt there is a need for more discretion in the size of the units to allow a larger home design for this market. Custom buyers want larger houses. She asked that houses sizes be site specific; for example, Lots 88, 92 and 96 are highly visible because they are on a knoll. Other lots are not within the view corridor and are larger in size and she asked that larger houses be allowed there. Ms. Michelotti asked if the current conditions allow a 30 foot house to step up indefinitely? Ms. Merrill said no, there is a thirty foot maximum. She is asking for Council to allow two feet for the foundation and allow flexibility to work with each site individually. Mr. Tarvet stated he had been out to the site and it seems only Lot 94 truly has a problem with stepping. Is all this for one lot? Ms. Merrill explained that grading was a problem and the slopes are deceiving. Assistance was needed for Lots 94, 95 and 96, with allowance for the step on lots 88, 89, and 90, and to some degree on Lots 97 and 98. They do not need to go beyond forty feet. Where 9 2/04/97