PC 012203 - Laserfiche WebLink

building permits were issued, if determined not to be an obstruction to the other work; and other safety issues must be addressed, such as filling holes on the property and repairing fences. The neighbors subsequently appealed the Zoning Administrator's action, not on the basis of the design, but on the performance of the applicant in completing the work. The letter from the appellants requested Mr. Duggan to complete the other repairs and improveirients to the property that would restore it to a safe and attractive condition before he is given approval to begin a new improvement proj ect_ Staff believed the design was attractive, and that the additions met design standards and were compatible with the existing house and the surrounding neighborhood_ Staff believed that the neighbors' concerns were reasonable, and understands their frustrations over the years. Staff had tried to structure approvals in the past with conditions that were designed to motivate and expedite the fulfillment of these issues in completion of the project. If this application stands as approved by the Zoning Administrator's staff, staff will ensure that these conditions are adhered to; if not, code enforcement action will be pursued, even if another design review application is submitted. Staff agrees with the neighbors that the property must be restored to a reasonable condition_ He noted that several items that the neighbors would like to have completed before new construction occurred may be impracri cal. A number of items were identiF ed that could be accomplished, including= 1 _ Inspections by the Building Department for any interior work done; 2. Phasing the landscaping, and placing it so it would not interfere with the work- 3. Fill the holes on the property; 4. Repair the side yard fence; 5. Install the front porch if it did not interfere with the rest of the work. Staff would not recommend denial of the design review application, which was attractive and compatible with the neighborhood, with these stringent conditions attached_ He noted that a design review could not be denied because of an applicant's prior history. Staff had addressed the neighborhood's concerns, and believed. they were addressed in the strict conditions. Staff recommended denial of the appeal, and approval of the original design review application as noted in Exhibit B in the conditions of approval. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts, Mr. Iserson conf3rmcd that the house was occupied. Commissioner Roberts expressed concern about the unsafe condition of the front stairs. Mr. Iserson advised that the porch did not appear to meet code, and added that would be addressed by the Building Department. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 22, 2003 Page I 1