CCMIN111505 - Laserfiche WebLink

presented to staff, the Planning Commission and Council. He referred to the mention of the two viewpoint perspectives as noted by the previous speaker and said these were selected by staff and are precise. The applicant sympathized with the groundwater concerns that the homeowners have in this area and he did not believe it would be an issue with his lot and it is an issue that must be resolved by the City and individual homeowners. The applicant was confident that the project complied with the design guidelines and all of the FAR's and because staff has agreed with the applicant's conclusion, he respectfully requested Council to uphold the appeal of the Zoning Administrator's approval and allow Mr. Quartaroli to begin construction of his home. Mr. Brozosky asked if recycled gray water techniques would be used on this project? Mr. Townsend said not at this point but it was one Green Building measure that could be included. Mr. Brozosky said he had concerns about using recycled gray water techniques. Kevin Close, a Happy Valley resident, mentioned the overall goal for the Happy Valley Specific Plan was intended to preserve the existing semi-rural character of the neighborhood and nowhere in the Specific Plan or in any of the related documents including the Mariposa Ranch Design Guidelines were estate sized homes and lots mentioned. He noted that in the original PUD-98-016 conditions of approval, it mentioned that production home designs should be subject to review and approval. The goals and the City standards in Section 1, Item A for the Mariposa Ranch Design Guidelines as approved by the Planning Commission and Council stated, ''the design of the accessory structures should be in keeping with the semi-rural character rules of the area," and he noted there would be no accessory structures as the applicant has used all of the FAR in its main mass of one solid building. He was concerned about large homes being placed on small lots and that the reviews and character would be destroyed, contrary to the provisions of the Specific Plan. Vanessa Kawaihau, a Happy Valley resident, said the County is in the processing of adopting new regulations, which would require testing for all existing septic systems in the County. The Board of Supervisors effectively lifted the moratorium in August when it approved nine new on-site specific wastewater treatment systems for 255 Happy Valley Road. She referred to a letter she submitted regarding this project, which was 600 feet larger than the project presented this evening. The proposed two-story custom home is 31 feet larger and the garage is 630 smaller. She was concerned about the mass of this project and if this home had not encroached on its easements to the left and right of it, it would fit better in the neighborhood. She believed the garage doors faced the Happy Valley Specific Plan bypass road route and since the location of the bypass road has not been determined, she asked if this would be acceptable to Council? She referred to the Conditions of Approval, Attachment B to the staff report, and mentioned there was no opportunity for the Happy Valley community to discuss recycled gray water because it was a condition that was added after the Planning Commission public hearing. By not having a full public hearing on use of gray water, the City missed an opportunity to address having pretreated gray water usage. She noted that Condition 13 could be strengthened and suggested Best Management Guidelines for high table areas. She pointed out that Condition 36 mentioned that all site improvements and house construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. She believed the Mariposa Ranch Design Guidelines stated the construction and site improvements hours on Saturdays are from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. She also wanted to see this condition to require no Pleasanton City Council Minutes 17 11/1 5/05