SR 06:221 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Shutts replied 100 feet. Ms. Decker mentioned the shading actually goes beyond the adjacent property owners home. Mr. Shutts explained and noted that the existing roof ridge casts part of the shadow. Ms. Decker asked the total height from grade to ridge height and the grade difference between the two properties. Mr. Otto replied that total height is 28 feet as measured from the grade at the rear ofthe house, but not sure ofthe grade difference. Mr. Shutts answered the grade difference was approximately 8 to 9 feet. Mr. Heman, 4582 Second Street, stated he is in support of this project. Mr. Decker asked Mr. Hernan ifhe was okay with the balcony. Mr. Hernan explained that he was fine with the balcony. Mr. Shutts stated that the balcony is off two bedrooms, so the activity would be limited. Ms. Lutman, 4524 Second Street, stated she was in support of this project. Ms. Decker asked Ms. Lutman if she had any sun and or shading concerns. Ms. Lutman answered she would have a concern ifher house would be in the shadow, but she is far enough away and does not have a problem with this proposal. Mr. Boyce, 4546 Second Street, stated that he talked with other neighbors and that some ofthem do have concerns regarding the massing of the home. He mentioned he did not think it was a big addition until he looked at the plans. He realized the addition is to the front, back, side and height making it a major proj ect. Mr. Boyce stated the following: · The house sits on top of a hill without screening, so any addition would be very visible to neighbors and from the street. · Massing change is quite large. · Most of the massing is due to the roof change. · Hip roof on his side only, not on other sides and would be visible from Angela Street. · The applicant did not show him the plans. · Nice house design, but it is a large house. Minutes, Zoning Administrator, PV-153/PADR-1536 June 15,2006 Page 2