CCMIN021511 - Laserfiche WebLink

He discussed the mediation process held on October 6 and November 22, 2010 and proposed concessions. Over the last few days, over 21 emails were received in support of the project, and a revised Condition 7 is proposed for flexibility of landscape species. The Council's options are to: 1) uphold the appeal and deny the proposed project, 2) deny the appeal and approve the project as proposed subject to conditions, 3) deny the appeal but to add mitigations offered by the Lopez' during the mediation process, or 4) continue to work on the proposal. David Persin, appellant, on behalf of three different families said the applicants fill their supporting documentation with accusations which decreases their credibility. He spoke of statements regarding placement of a trampoline in their backyard, and the fact that the applicant's backyard is less than 8 feet from their rear side bedrooms is the dispute. He added information about never exceeding noise levels, 9:00 p.m. curfews during school nights, and said the only numbers provided for the current project and neighborhood comparables those provided by the applicant to the City. The chart of mitigations, compromises, concessions and considerations positions the applicants as having done all they can do to compromise and this has led him to the conclusion that there is always more that can be done. Mr. Persin asked that the Council postpone making a decision to provide time for each member to visit the applicant and appellant homes and form their own opinions, which is critical to make a fair and representative position. They asked to make a decision based on creating compromise which may involve redrafting of plans for a smaller second story addition, combined with a partial first story addition or other revision. He acknowledges this is not what the applicants want, but they similarly do not want any second story addition at all and asked for an actual compromise and not simply cosmetic fixes. Councilmember McGovern read requirements of the 1969 document, Condition #6 and questioned whether it was assumed that a review process by a Committee would be conducted. Mr. Dolan said yes, but it was considered in the context that the Committee does not exist. Councilmember McGovern suggested the need for a Commission or peer review process and a process to address disputes prior to projects going to the Planning Commission and Council. She also suggested staff provide colored renditions of elevations in the future. Mr. Dolan said there are no design guidelines specific to the neighborhood and staff utilizes the zoning code and to retroactively include an additional design process for one neighborhood could be problematic. Councilmember Sullivan cited the proposal as discretionary, believes approval has much to do with neighborhood compatibility, impacts to neighbors, appropriate relationship of building to adjoining areas, scale of buildings, consistency with neighborhood character and preservation of views enjoyed by residents and others. Councilmember Thorne referred to pages 4 to 8 on Attachment 3 and confirmed with Mr. Dolan that the applicant had provided this chart. Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio questioned the square footage of 6895 Heath Court and 4426 Bacon Court which look more balanced than some of the other two-story homes. Mr. Dolan said one of the second story additions is 1,030 square feet which is comparable to the proposal. He confirmed that 4229 Echo Court looks disproportionate at 734 square feet. Mr. Dolan also pointed out that second stories are not always designed by architects, and he was not sure whether the Lopez's plans were prepared by an architect or a designer. City Council Minutes Page 5 of 11 February 15,2011