CCMIN101706 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Brozosky questioned the garage and asked if it will support any weight of the house. Staff responded it will not. It will require a retaining wall to support the slope that is being cut and the garage would have to be engineered and subject to review at the time the of building permits to make sure the engineering is proper and the soils are not an issue. It was noted that the applicant plans to preserve the house. Staff advised it is not common to be requesting so many variances, but the lot is a bit out of character since it is narrow and deep. In response to question, staff noted that the retaining wall will be built into the garage wall and that the cut will be almost 10 feet high. Councilmember Sullivan questioned the applicant's option should Council decided to uphold the Planning Commission's decision. Staff responded Mr. Boyce's options would be to wait a year before coming back to the Council with a variance again. Another option would be for the Council to deny the applicant without prejudice or continue the item which would signal Council's intent not to approve the project but give the applicant the opportunity to redesign and come back. In response to question regarding the narrow character of the lot, it was noted that the Fire Department is part of the process in reviewing this plan. It was noted that they did not have particular issues. Council member McGovern referenced the Residential Policy 14, Page 76: Preserve and Protect the Character of the East Side neighborhood around Second Street from tear-downs, large-scaled and inappropriately-styled additions and lot consolidations. She questioned how you define where this is a large-scaled addition. Staff indicated it is a subjective interpretation and people would agree this is a large addition. As far as the scale goes, staff noted the applicant has tried through the revisions to downplay the scale of the house by stepping the house back and bringing the height down. It was noted there have been a number of large additions that have been built in this neighborhood. It is really a question of design and whether or not it looks appropriate. Staff provided a slide of the Boag's home and the planned addition. Councilmember McGovern referenced the Residential Policy 17 which reads "Protect the established size and spacing of buildings in residential neighborhoods by avoiding excessive lot coverage and maintaining appropriate separations between buildings." She questioned when looking at this sized lot with the garage building and the actual addition to the house, how much land will actually be left on the lot for outdoor play/use. Staff responded quite a bit; pointing out that if you take away the second floor footage and add in the garage, it comes out to be pretty close to the FARs with regard to lot coverage. Councilmember McGovern referenced the Heritage Trees stating the general "rule of thumb" is to prohibit changes of grade or trenching to occur within the drip line of trees to be preserved. She asked if that will occur on this lot. Staff responded that after the staff report was written, the applicant was required to get an arborist's report. The arborist felt with the appropriate mitigation measures the trees could be protected and saved and recommend that the walnut tree be removed as they are almost always problematic in residential areas. A condition was added City Council Minutes 10 October 17,2006