Laserfiche WebLink
the property with very little exception. It makes sense given the architecture of the <br /> existing home. There have been two mediations, buyers are made aware they are able <br /> to enlarge their homes up to two stories, and she believes they have made sacrifices <br /> and supported the staff and Planning Commission recommendation. <br /> Councilmember Sullivan agrees with Commission Blank that the lot and setting is <br /> unusual and is surprised with the 1969 agreement and whether it is something the <br /> Council would necessarily approve today. He also felt that a two-story addition on this <br /> lot would be completely out of character with the neighborhood, as all nearby streets are <br /> all one-story houses on very small lots. The fact that the addition would increase the <br /> FAR to 40% when literally every other house in a 3-4 block radius is 20% to 25% FAR is <br /> not something he would support. He believes the addition would put an unacceptable <br /> impact on the immediate neighbors, said most speakers in support do not live on the <br /> street and most have two stories homes that have been approved. The zoning is not an <br /> entitlement but subject to discretionary review, design review, and in looking at the <br /> criteria in the staff report, he cannot make the findings that have the appropriate <br /> relationship of the building to its site, the scale of buildings within the site and adjoining <br /> buildings, consistency with neighborhood character and preservation of views enjoyed <br /> by residents. He acknowledged the need to have a larger home, but to him, it is not an <br /> appropriate place to do it. He would support the appeal, and if there is room for <br /> compromise, he would be willing to support a smaller second story addition. <br /> Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio said she was sad this could not be settled between neighbors. <br /> She must make her decision on what she sees, is concerned that the mediation did not <br /> work as well as it might have. The Lopez's have not asked for any variances. It is within <br /> zoning, allowed by the CC&R's and supported by the Planning Commission. Regarding <br /> staffs options, she would like to see a modified Option 3, and asked whether or not the <br /> Perry's want the skylight, which she thinks is a reasonable mitigation, as well as <br /> additional landscaping. If the belly band is something the appellants did not necessarily <br /> want, she did not want the applicant to incur the added expense. <br /> Mayor Hosterman suggested a motion to approve Option 3 which is deny the appeal <br /> and approve the project as proposed, subject to conditions of approval that include <br /> mitigation measures offered during mediation, which she felt could be worked out. <br /> Councilmember Thorne said it is very difficult in such situations given conflict in a <br /> neighborhood. He thinks the project meets all criteria and zoning requirements and no <br /> variance has been requested. Therefore, he would lean on the rights of the property <br /> owner. He thinks it was a mistake not to erect the story poles which he thinks would <br /> have solved many problems, and supported Option 3. <br /> Councilmember McGovern said she sees this was not done by an architect, said the <br /> windows closest to the front door are not correct, and she suggested future staff reports <br /> include colored photos or renderings. She said going to a second story will occur more <br /> and more in Val Vista, and she noted the home is a 6 bedroom, 4 bath house on a <br /> 6,000 square foot lot, which is an incredible size for the lot, as well as its unusual lot <br /> EXCERPT: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES, February 15, 2011 Page 5 of 6 <br />