Laserfiche WebLink
56 <br /> <br /> Mr. Tash stated that he is so distraught that his house is now <br /> on the market. He moved 50,000 lbs. of furniture here from Boston <br /> and has invested several thousand dollars fixing up the home. When <br /> he purchased the house he intended to add a second story and was <br /> told that it was acceptable. He is going to lose a considerable <br /> amount of money on the sale. <br /> <br /> He reviewed the plans of the addition. Mr. Tash pointed out <br /> that aesthetics are a matter of individual taste and a property <br /> owner should not be penalized for using the full potential of his <br /> property. He has tried to reach reasonable solutions and pointed <br /> out that this is not a variance. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tash presented a letter of support from Albert Dutchover. <br /> <br /> Mr. John Schmit, 1558 Fairview Court, handed out binders to <br /> Council with photographs. He expressed his concern for the <br /> aesthetics of the neighborhood. He quoted the staff report where <br /> it said the addition was not compatible with the existing <br /> structure. Mr. Schmit did not feel the structure was compatible <br /> with the existing neighborhood. He stated that the requirement of <br /> additional trees is an indication that the addition is not <br /> appropriate if it has to be hidden. Mr. Schmit quoted from the <br /> CC&Rs for the development which requires the addition to be <br /> consistent with the neighborhood. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schmit urged Council to approve the appeal and stop the <br /> addition. He further asked Council to retain the Design Review <br /> Board and design professionals. He cited that Mr. Theile and Mr. <br /> Dutchover of the Design Review Board both indicated this design <br /> lacked architectural merit, but approved it because it met the <br /> Code. It was Mr. Schmit's opinion that Mr. Tash was not serious <br /> about selling his house. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico inquired about the Architectural Control Committee <br /> which is required by the CC&Rs. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schmit stated there is no Committee and no one reviewed <br /> the design, which was not done by an architect. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush indicated the CC&Rs are about twenty years old and <br /> over time all the lots are built upon and their Committees tend to <br /> dissolve. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico was concerned that other CC&Rs, for Foothill Road <br /> property for example, will disappear and all the earthquake <br /> standards, etc. will disappear. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush indicate the difference there is that earthquake and <br /> slide issues will be covered by a geological hazard assessment <br /> <br /> 01/19/93 6 <br /> <br /> <br />