3A Public Hearing 2006 1204 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

PLN2006-00074 (Appeal of the BZA Approval ofPLN2005-00063) 6 December 4, 2006 One Boardrnember, while not concerned about the overall square footage of the dwelling, expressed a desire to have the home spread out and not exceed the l8-foot height limit. The applicant has indicated that the amount of dirt to be excavated and filled ("cut and fill") required to place the structure as it is proposed to be stepped up the hill would exceed that of the current proposal. It is staffs opinion that this alternative would be more geotechnica11y disruptive compared to the current proposal. The Chief Building Official has reviewed the proposed building placement and structural configuration of the main dwelling and in-law unit and has made a preliminary determination that the site stability is such that the project should not affect the hillside. His review of the soil and geologic reports prepared for the 1989 subdivision, as well as observations of the project site, leads him to believe that the site is stable provided the recommendations are followed. This preliminary determination has been verified by a new geotechnical report for the specific project parameters (Attachment 22), which included eight new borings that correspond to the proposed building foundations. The City's Chief Building Official will require that the report is peer reviewed by an independent, third party expert. This study will also be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to issuance of any approvals for grading or building permits for the structures. Furthermore, the soils engineer that prepared the reports is required to be present on site at the time of grading for the building pad and drilling of the foundation piers to ensure that the depths and location of the piers correspond to the soils report borings. Summary of Public Outreach Efforts For the July 20, 2006, Board of Zoning Adjustments meeting, and the September 5 and December 4, 2006 City Council meetings, the following public outreach was performed: a legal advertisement for the public hearing was placed in the Daily Review newspaper; public hearing notification letters were mailed to property owners and business owners within 500 feet of the project site including property owners within unincorporated Alameda County, and to the Bay-O- Vista Improvement Association; and public notification placards were posted on the utility poles adjacent to the subject property. At the Board of Zoning Adjustments hearing, public comments were received from two residents from Midland Road in the unincorporated Alameda County area south of the subject site, expressing concern over the size of the horne, traffic generation and soil erosion from the horne's construction. Residents of Vista grand Drive expressed concern over the hill stability to the north of the site and the effect on their views by the proposed structure. The appellant, Wayland Lew, also spoke against the project, stating that the height of the structure would restrict views and restated the concern over hill stability. Finally, residents from outside the immediate area spoke both in favor and in opposition to the concept of the "monster home". Minutes from this meeting are attached in Exhibit 6. Additional neighborhood letters were handed to the City Clerk's office at the time that the appeal was filed. These letters, as well as any correspondence to the Board of Zoning Adjustments, are attached to this report in Exhibit 24. In addition to adding support to the above-mentioned issues in the appeal, these letters also express concern over the number of people that might live in the large home and question whether a precedent would be set by approval of the height exception. No