3 - Laserfiche WebLink

Figure 6: Design Revisions - Exterior Stairway (revised/current design) G >� 0I. k axal / KFTCHEN 1=9 n ' r 1 E ti€C41 , .a.wcwF..�. v' C6'> u / 1 mm, C — BED ROC,M ,o 1 a3 EeAm ,E;CLOSE' LIVING ROOM 1 E EEC RCON As designed, staff believes the location of the stair minimizes impact to the neighboring residence, while providing the necessary access to the unit. The revised design is an improvement over the initial design because it allows for greater separation from the neighboring home and avoids the stair structure being located in front of neighbors' bedroom windows, reducing potential noise and privacy issues. As noted above, the minor projection of the stairway into the side-yard setback is permitted, based on provisions of the PMC. It should be noted that during the ZA review process, staff discussed with the applicant other options for placement of the stairs. These included placing the stairs at the rear of the home, providing an interior stair within the garage, and connecting the ADU from the inside of the home only. All options were found to be infeasible or unacceptable to the applicant for various reasons: including conflict with existing rear-yard improvements, loss of parking within the garage, and failure to meet the applicant's desire to have separate exterior access for the unit, in addition to an interior connection. Based on the above considerations, the ZA found the project was appropriate as designed, and would not create undue impacts to the neighboring property with respect to building separation, setbacks, or solar access. P19-0130 Planning Commission 13 of 15 revisions to lessen the perceived impacts of the addition and stairway, such as modification to the stairway location or design, and potential adjustments to the size or design of the addition, (e.g. reducing the size of the addition or stepping back the second floor.) With respect to the massing of the addition itself, significant changes were determined to be infeasible, given the already modest size of the addition (480 square feet), and need to accommodate appropriate living space within the ADU. Other design changes, such as stepping back the second story, or modifying the roof, were determined to be undesirable because the addition would be less-well integrated, architecturally, into the existing home, than the design as proposed. Given these factors, the conformance of the addition to applicable standards', and outcomes of the shadow study, the ZA found the design and massing of the addition to be acceptable. However, the exterior stairway was redesigned. The original design included a single flight of stairs running the length of the garage wall. Based on comments, it was modified to include a As previously noted,the project site is located in a PUD district where the underlying PUD requires a side-yard setback of 10 feet(one side)and 20 feet(combined).The existing home,as constructed, is set back 15 feet from the west property line at its closest point,a larger setback than the standards would require. The proposed addition would be built directly above the existing garage and would maintain the existing building setback. P19-0130 Planning Commission 11 of 15