PC 012203 - Laserfiche WebLink

THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED_ In response to an inquiry by G'hairperson Arkin, Mr. Iserson detailed the code enforcement process for noise violations. He noted that letters would be sent, and after a certain amount of time, if compliance was not achieved, a hearing with the Compliance Officer would be held. The Compliance Officer had discretion with respect to the sanctions and $nes that may be levied_ Ms. IVerland advised that a citation could be issued for a noise violation, which was $ 100 for the first offense_ A discussion of the coda enforcement process ensued_ In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Sullivan, Mr. Iserson confirmed that the design review could be denied if the Commission did not like the design of the addition. Cotrimissioner Sullivan noted that this house was already larger than the other homes on the street, and added that the addition would almost double the size of the house. He believed that the addition was not in character with the rest of the neighborhood, and that he would not support this modification as a design review. Commissioner Sedlak advised that he liked the design of the addition. Commissioner Roberts noted that she supported denial of the design review because the project was too big for the applicant to complete. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Sedlak whether the residents had any other options to pursue, Mr. Iserson replied that they were Following the correct procedures_ Chairperson Arkin concurred with Commissioner Sullivan's assessment, and hoped that the applicant could work with staff_ Commissioner Sullivan moved to uphold Case PAP-43 ~PADR-669, John Duggan), and to deny Case PADR-669 based on the size of the addition_ Commissioners Roberts seconded the motion ROLL CALL VOTE AYES: Commissioners Arkin, Roberts, Sedlak, and Sullivan NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioners Kemeny and Maas Resolution No. PC-2003-02 was entered and adopted as motioned. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 22, 2003 Page 14