CCMIN091906 - Laserfiche WebLink

1. Make the Variance Findings as listed on pages 4-5 of the Zoning Administrator's staff report; and 2. Adopt the draft resolution denying the appeal and, therefore, approving Cases PV-153 and PADR-1536, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit "B." Mayor Hosterman opened the public hearing. Dustin Boyce, Appellant, addressed the City Council noting he lives next door to the proposed home. He indicated he moved there because of the uniqueness of the homes, size of the lots, and the different setbacks .and home designs. They were attracted to the downtown area because of the restaurants and the downtown atmosphere. He indicated he and his wife started the city approval process for their addition long before the Boag's in the Fall of 2005. He indicated their addition included maintaining the current front setback with all of the addition being to the rear of the property. With staff guidance and input from his neighbors, he has revised his drawings four times and believed it would receive staff support. He indicated he appealed the Boag's home addition because he thinks both home additions should be considered together, using the same standard. He is not there to delay Mr. Boag's project. but instead to make sure the same stand is applied to both. He added, Mr. Boag, in leading opposition to his addition was calling his home too massive and a monstrosity. When he reviewed the plans for Mr. Boag's addition, he noted the major impact his addition was going to add to the neighborhood and the streetscape. For instance, Mr. Boag's building frontage on Second Street is 82% whereas his proposed addition is only 67%. His is 30 feet wide and Mr. Boag's is 65 feet wide. Mr. Boyce continued by explaining the proposed impacts. He suggested that the Council continue this item and ask that it be brought back at the same time as his proposed plans, or after the neighbors have worked in good faith together to get their issues resolved. In response to question, Mr. Boyce noted his issue is with the side-yard setback variance, as well as the main "math" of the whole project itself. Staff recapped the two processes of each project that has been moving forward. Staff indicated both applicants are being reviewed under the same standards. He also explained the Boyce's project did receive some neighborhood concerns. In response to Council question, staff explained floor area ratio, which is based on the total square footage of the house and comparing that with the square footage of the lot. In this zoning district, the code requires no more than 40%. In this case, Mr. Boag's floor area ratio is approximately 26.7%, so it complies. Mr. Boyce is requesting a variance to 45% for his lot. The City is reviewing issues such as floor area ratio and second units over garages in an effort to understand that the downtown residential district is somewhat unique and yet very desirable in an effort to come up with slightly different standards in order to accommodate the remodeling proposals that many of the residents have been seeking. City Council Minutes Page 5 of 13 September 19, 2006