CCMIN071503 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chris Schlies, 699 Peters Avenue, Suite B, said he had heard a number of policy points that could be debated and realized this is a very difficult decision for the Council. There have been comments about trends and problems in a San Jose neighborhood. Also comments about impacts on diversity, newcomers who are changing neighborhoods, loss of affordability, old residents vs. new residents, etc. This is a case about one family wanting to change their house, not the world. Until there is a General Plan review, he felt Council must decide on a case-by- case basis within existing zoning rules. He felt the major considerations are impacts. In this case, they are not great. There is no impact on sun because the Crofton house is north of the Diaz house. There is no impact on views. There is no view of Mt. Diablo, or a park, etc. There is a little bit of sky that would be lost. Compared to other considerations, he felt this was a minimal impact. Privacy is an issue often discussed, but that was not raised at this meeting. The impact most talked about is mass. That is fairly vague and undefined. The plans of Mr. Aufder Maur allow the Croftons the space they need with very little impact on the footprint of the house and works well with the original architecture of the house and fits the neighborhood. He did not feel the addition dramatically changes anything and does not warrant denial of the plan. Mrs. Diaz did not feel there had been any compromise and she and her husband are being asked to accept a massive addition. Mr. Diaz agreed it was a massive addition. He felt the Croftons could get the space they needed with a single-story addition. He said Mr. Crofton had sent a memo promising to minimize impacts and to make sure he was comfortable with his plans. He has not kept his promise. There were no further speakers, and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Ms. Ayala, seconded by Mr. Brozosky, to adopt Resolution No. 03-088, denying the appeal and approving design review approval under Case PADR-279. Mr. Brozosky said this is difficult and he was trying to see if anything could be changed. He felt if the top story were moved, it would not look as good. The house is already two-stories and there are other second-story additions in the neighborhood, so it is consistent. Trees will be added and that will help. He was concerned that the air conditioner compressor not be moved closer to the Diaz house. He wanted to find some noise mitigation for that. Ms. Hosterman felt there was a huge distinction between the Siner application and this application. The last one had to do with a reasonable belief the character of a neighborhood would be maintained forever. Here there is a couple who wants to add to their home to accommodate a growing family. The house is in a neighborhood of equally sized homes. She believed the Crofton plans are terrific and will be an addition to the neighborhood. She realized there would be an impact on the Diazes but did not feel it would be as great as they think. She referred to the issue of mass and felt that was subjective. She felt the Crofton plan fit the neighborhood and supported the Planning Commission action to approve the proposal. Mayor Pico felt this was significantly different from the Siner proposal. In the first proposal, it was changing the character of the Rosepointe neighborhood. When one talks about mass, he felt the Siner house in relation to the Karo house, really did appear massive. The Pleasanton City Council 19 07/15/03 Minutes