PC 052803 - Laserfiche WebLink

mother and to provide sufficient living space for his growing family_ He noted that he hired a Former Davis City official to design the addition, and noted that he was Familiar with City issues. He noted that he wished to minimize the impact on his neighbors, and was motivated to maintain good relations with the neighbors. He had submitted the fourth draft to the Commission, and designed the addition so that no windows overlooked the Karo property. He noted that his existing roofline was already very high due to the cathedral ceilings in the living room, and added that the new roofline would not exceed the existing height. Mr. Siner believed that because his home was at the end of the court, there would be no imbalance in the neighborhood. He noted that of the 62 lots in Rosepointe, nine homes had a second story or an addition. He noted that the nearest second story home was 150 feet away from his home. He noted that he and the designer tried very hard to meet the City's requirements and to minimize the impact on the neighbors. In response to an inquiry by G'ommissioner Koberts, Mr. Siner noted that they had considered adding a second unit behind the garage. However, they recently landscaped that area, which was not flat. It would require expensive mitigation of the steep slope behind the garage_ Commissioner Sullivan noted that the home's floor area ratio was small at 28%, and inquired whether he had considered expanding the home between the main house and the garage on the ground floor. Mr. Siner replied that there was space, but the layout was extremely awkward and skewed. The garage is detached, and any addition would block existing windows in the living and family room. He noted that he and his wife needed a less cramped closet situation in their bedroom_ Mr. Siner noted that he would be willing to examine the suggestion of stopping the addition before it approached the high-pitched roof, and believed that would give them the living space they desired_ I-Ie noted. that he was willing to explore any idea, and was aware that his neighbors were not happy. He was aware of his rights as a homeowner, but he desired an amicable, long-term relationship with his neighbors_ A discussion of the original Features of the home ensued Ms. Danielle Karo, 6578 Stanton Court, noted that she strongly opposed this application. She summarized the history of the neighborhood, and noted that when she and her husband bought their home, they were assured by the original developer that no second- story homes would be allowed. She noted that the applicant's single-story home had already been built, and that it would not be converted into a two-story home. Given this assurance, that they paid a premium to build their home so as to maximize privacy. She noted that she shared a common walkway with the Siners. Ms_ Karo noted that a second story in close proximity to their home would block sunlight and impact the privacy of their kitchen. She distributed photos to the Commissioners of those points of view. She believed that her quality of life would be negatively impacted, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTi/S May 28, 2003 Page 4