CCMIN110299 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Ayala indicated every'one has a personal taste. She did not think a property owner should be required to have his neighbors help design his home because of the differences in taste. She felt Council was pitting neighbor against neighbor because it can't make decisions. Mr. Layer has the right to add a second story under the zoning regulations. Ms. Dennis agreed the Layers have the right to add a second story under the zoning regulations and the fact is others in the neighborhood have done it. She believed that Pleasanton is entering a period where more and more people will be altering their homes. Times change and nothing stays the same forever. She felt it was fair to ask people to try to overcome the objections. It may be that none of the neighbors are totally satisfied, but she would feel better if more of the concerns had been addressed. As an example, the second story over the garage is like every other addition and she would like some variation. She suggested continuing the item in order to work on the plan. Ms. Michelotti felt alternative plans could turn out to be cost prohibitive and then we are back in the same situation. If the design is changed to move the addition closer to the street, it could look far worse that what is now proposed. The cypress trees may present a problem because of the birds, but that may be addressed. She did not feel the neighbors can force the Lavers to cut the trees. Ms. Ayala referred to the staff recommendations for design changes and asked if that was sufficient that this addition does not look like the house next door. Mr. Swift said the Layer addition will not look like the house next door and described the design differences. The key issues are privacy and blocked views. A second story addition, no matter where it is constructed on the house, will have the same impact on the Sundells and Sasses. It would have a slightly different impact on the Bartholomew's second story view. If this were a new subdivision, staff would require a second story portion of a house on a comer lot like this on the inside rather than out next to the main comer. The location of the Laver proposal is what would be done on a new house. It is also typical in Pleasanton to see second story additions over garages rather than over the living space, but that is an economic issue rather than a design issue, because it is easier because of stairways, and avoids conflicts with heating and air conditioning facilities. It was moved by Mayor Tarver, seconded by Mr. Pico, to approve AP-99-08 and uphold the appeal. Ms. Dennis asked Mr. Sx~ift if this design had the least impact of any two story design that could be proposed for this house. Mr. Swift said in terms of privacy and massing, it would have the least impact of any traditional type of second stoW' addition, without redoing the elevation of the ground floor garage area. By putting it Ibrxvard on the lot, it has the least impact on the privacy of the Bartholomews, Sasses. and Sundells. However, it does partially block the view of Pleasanton City Council 9 11/02/99 Minutes