14 - Laserfiche WebLink

The duration of the construction activities at the Smiths prompted the neighbors to raise objections to this administrative design review application. The neighbors felt that they were misled and misinformed by Mr. Smith regarding the original scope of the 2001 approval. They did not expect that the construction would take such a long time and that their privacy had been significantly impacted by both the previously approved and currently requested additions. Project Description The project consists of the following: O an approximately 64-square-foot single-story addition on the left side of the house; and, D an approximately 273-square-foot second-story addition on the right side front of the existing residence. Staff notes that square footage for the proposed additions were verified on the job site. The additions as built include approximately 287-square-foot second-story addition and approximately 70-square-foot one-story addition, as shown on Exhibit A. DISCUSSION Zoning Administrator The Zoning Administrator held three hearings and found that the additions, despite the fact that they were constructed without prior approval and permit, conform to the zoning regulations in terms of the setbacks, building height, and maximum allowable Floor Area Ratio. The Zoning Administrator approved Case No. PADR-1698, therefore, allowing for the addition, totaling 337 square feet in size. The neighbors appealed this decision because they believed that the City should not condone work done without a permit. The neighbors requested that the non-permitted portions (i.e. the 64-square-foot first-floor addition and the 273-square-foot second-floor addition) be denied and removed. Planning Commission On September 26, 2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the subject application. After hearing staff's presentation and taking public testimony, the Commission denied the appeal, thereby upholding the Zoning Administrator's approval by a 4-to-1 vote. The Commission was ensured by the applicants and their general contractor that they were able to complete the construction within the timeline specified in the conditions proposed by staff, and that financing to complete the project is readily available. The Commission approved the application including conditions that require staff to initiate a code enforcement process if the construction is not complete within the timeline. The appellants filed an appeal to the City Council. The September 26, 2007 Planning Commission meeting minutes are attached for the Council's information (Attachment 4). Page 3 of 6