11 - Laserfiche WebLink

9 The Johnsons and Mr. Wittig indicated that the subject property is in poor maintenance and a constant state of disrepair; 6 The Johnsons and Mr. Wittig indicated that the subject property has a long history of police activity and calls for service (Exhibit H) and that increasing the size of the home would exacerbate those issues, as well as increase crime in the neighborhood given non- residents were always coming and going to and from the subject property; and ® The Johnsons and Mr. Wittig indicated that residents on Yellowstone Court felt unsafe and have been victims of property vandalism, including yard urination, and that increasing the size of the home would worsen those issues by expanding the capacity of the residence. Prior to the Zoning Administrator hearing, staff asked the Johnsons whether a vegetative screen in combination with frosted glass on the proposed north and west-facing second-story windows directly or indirectly facing their property would satisfy their privacy concerns. Given their other concerns stated above, the Johnsons requested, at a minimum, that the proposed second-story window on the north-facing (right side) elevation be removed completely from the project scope. The Johnsons were reluctant to accept a vegetative screen because: (1) they did not feel the trees would be properly maintained based on the current property condition; and (2) more vegetation close to the property line would introduce root intrusion and contribute debris to their swimming pool. Subsequently, the Johnsons and Mr. Wittig requested a Zoning Administrator hearing to discuss their concerns and potential solutions further with staff and the applicants/appellants. On May 25, 2017, a Zoning Administrator hearing was held on the project. The hearing was attended by approximately 15 members of the public including the Johnsons, Mr. Wittig, the applicants/appellants, Joe Cravotta, and other nearby residents (please refer to Exhibit D for hearing minutes). At the hearing, the Zoning Administrator asked the applicants/appellants to provide more detail on their motivation for constructing additional bedrooms, their history at the property including the more recent history surrounding the police activity and calls for service, and their willingness to modify the project and/or provide mitigation for the project impacts based on neighborhood concerns. The applicants/appellants and their contractor Joe Cravotta indicated that they had multiple grandchildren living with them in the residence and that those children were approaching ages that necessitated them being in separate rooms. The applicants/appellants also indicated that their adult children, and associates of their adult children, had stayed at the residence for extended periods of time in the recent past. The applicants/appellants further explained that the police activity and calls for service were related to warrants for one of their adult children, but also because of neighbors calling in code violations or perceived code violations. Lastly, the applicants/appellants were open to providing mitigation for the project impacts such as a vegetative screen and frosted glass in all of the proposed second-story windows; however, they were reluctant to modify the project in a way that would compromise the interior layout. The applicants/appellants also indicated that they were considering eliminating a bedroom on the ground floor, but that this change would not require modifications to the exterior of the home. At the hearing, the Zoning Administrator also asked the Johnsons, Mr. Wittig, and the other members of the public in attendance to express any comments or concerns they had related to the project. The Zoning Administrator also asked the Johnsons if a vegetative screen and frosted glass on the north and west-facing second-story windows directly or indirectly facing their property would adequately address their privacy concerns. The Johnsons again rejected P17-0372, 3552 Yellowstone Court Planning Commission Page 3 of 10