SR 06:245 - Laserfiche WebLink

PAP-93, Dennis and Barbara Georl!:atos. Appellants lPADR-1472, Stan and Stacev Knil!:hO Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's approval of an application for administrative design review to construct: (1) an approximately 180-square-foot covered patio; (2) an approximately 292-square-foot first-floor addition on the rear; and (3) an approximately 1,251-square-foot second-story addition over pari of the center and side portions of the existing residence located at 779 Mirador Court. Zoning for the property is R-1-6,500 (Single-Family Residential) District. Ms. Decker introduced the project planner, Natalie Amos, who would be available to answer specific questions on the project, and added that Robin Giffin would be presenting the staff report. Commissioner Blank disclosed that he had met with the appellant the previous day. Commissioner Pearce disclosed that she had met with the applicant, appellant, and one neighbor. Commissioner Olson disclosed that he had met with the applicant, appellant, and two neighbors. Commissioner Fox disclosed that she had met with the applicant, appellant, and one neighbor. Chairperson Arkin disclosed that he had met with the applicant and appellant. Ms. Giffin summarized the staff report, detailing the history, scope, and layout of the proposed second-story addition. She noted that after the applicants and their architect were unable to come to an agreement with the neighbors with respect to concerns regarding the proposal being out of character in their neighborhood, privacy, loss of view, shadowing, and decline in property values, a Zoning Administrator hearing was held. Ms. Decker conducted site visits to 790 East Angela Street, 798 East Angela Street, 779 Mirador Court, and the surrounding neighborhood. The potential impacts from the proposed addition were assessed, and the following mitigation measures were discussed: (1) relocating the master bedrooms windows to the east and west elevations; (2) adding trees to soften the appearance ofthe addition and mitigate privacy concerns; and 3) moving the stairway farther to the east, which in turn would decrease the square footage and eliminate a small portion of the second-story addition. After the third meeting, the applicants were the only ones supportive of the proposed mitigation measures, with the exception of moving the stairway. The applicants believed their request was consistent with other City approvals in their zoning district. Following the Zoning Administrator Hearing, staff worked with both the applicants and the appellants to find mitigation measures that would be acceptable to both parties; that mediation process was unsuccessful. The appellants would prefer that the applicants build a one-story addition, believing that a second-story addition would devalue their home. If the Planning Commission were to approve a second-story addition, the appellants would like the following to be included in the conditions of approval: 1. Replace the existing four-foot-six-inch fence along the rear of the applicants' property line with a seven-foot fence (six-foot solid and one-foot lattice) to be paid for by the applicants; 2. Use only non-deciduous trees that would not grow to a height above the elevation of the second story so there is no blocking of additional skyline; 3. Eliminate any new windows on the rear elevation; and EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, June 14,2006 Page 1 of9