PC 113011 Special Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

house nicely from the street, with a loft above the first-floor living room downstairs with an average height of six feet and would not qualify for habitable square footage because its height is less than seven feet. Commissioner Blank thanked Mr. Cunningham for leaving story poles up as long as they did. Debbie Ayres stated that her backyard and that of the proposed home are adjacent to each other. She indicated that the first proposal had a balcony and a window looking into her backyard and bedroom, which were removed, and the master bedroom and bathroom had a high window for light to get into the bedroom. She noted that the revised plans now show a study/loft with windows looking into her backyard and into her bedroom area. She stated that she opposed the project because of the size of the building as well as the windows that look into her yard. She expressed concern that the window on the west side of the house looks right into the window of the rental home, and with only about ten feet between the two houses, there could be privacy issues in the future. Ms. Ayres that she was at the last meeting but did not speak, and watching the process, she was surprised that the architect was allowed to speak a second time. She noted that it appeared those who have more power and prestige and money are given preferential treatment and suggested that the Commission make decisions based on the facts and the law and ordinances in place rather than on who is friends with whom. Christine Bourg stated that she would like to present a few remarks highlighting the reasons why she is asking the Commission to deny the application. She noted that her house is 35 feet from the proposed structure and not 39 feet as stated several times by the applicant and the architect. She displayed a picture of the story poles taken from her kitchen window, stating that a similar photograph could be taken from three other points in their house which look down at the project. She indicated that her art studio, which is not a garage or shed and which she considers part of her compound and buildings on her lot, and where she spends a lot of time, is only 7.5 feet from the proposed structure. She added that the shade study requested by the Commission at th the April 13 meeting, which she understood was to be completed by a professional, was done by Mr. Cunningham who is not a professional. remodel versus demolition, Ms. Bourg stated that all the documents from Mr. Huff regarding the proposal from 2009 to the present refer to this proposal as a , while staff has considered it a demolition or a take-down in all of its reports. She noted that the Downtown Design Guidelines (DTDG) states on page 10 that Remodeling retains the essential floor area, roof, and pointed out that a remodel is not turning a 480-square-foot cottage into a 1,700-square-foot house, leaving no visible sign of the old dwelling. She added that the only reason it is before the Planning Commission is because it is a non-conforming lot; but if the cottage is demolished and replaced with new construction, the new structure PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 30, 2011 Page 5 of 19