CCMIN030408 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember McGovern confirmed there has been some level of continuous construction since 2002, that approximately 1,400 square feet has been added to the original home and she suggested the City lower green building requirements for the current 2,000 square foot remodels. Mayor Hosterman opened the public hearing. Dennis Long, appellant, requested the Council reconsider the decisions made by the previous administrative hearings of the non-permitted addition, emphasized frustration and dismay over noise, dust and the several years of construction, said the owner is aware of regulations, discussed a similar situation in 2003 at 3573 Kings Canyon Court, questioned whether Mr. Smith had been working on more than one project at a time, voiced concerns with the methodology and communication of the building, planning and zoning departments' handling of additions and project timelines, the code enforcement process, and follow-up of conditions. He asked the City to enforce its rules, requested the structure be removed immediately, negotiate an amicable agreement between all parties involve and he believed allowing the project will set a precedent. Robert Leete, appellant, requested the Council approve the appeal of the Planning Commission's action, reconsider and overturn the previous administrative actions, and to enforce the agreement and 2001 permit. He said the property has been under continuous construction for over 15 years, said the applicant promised the project would be finished in six months which was 6 years ago, the illegal and non-permitted portions of the construction and failure to abide by the 2001 permit exacerbates the intolerable situation, he did not feel landscaping would provide necessary screening for some time, and he discussed his eroded quality of life. He said the work done to date adds about 70% to what currently exists in the neighborhood and makes the house approximately 3,600 square feet, the home now obstructs much of his light which once existed and he believes the applicant knowingly avoided the process. He asked the Council to 1) abate and remove the non-permitted structures from the building; 2) ask the applicant to follow the process in the future; 3) add a condition that there be no more permits on the property until the 2001 permit is completed; and 4) ask staff to enforce the 2001 conditions, particularly with respect to the landscape screening. Frank Morgan, appellant, said decisions by the Planning Commission focus only on Mr. Smith's efforts and expense in remodeling his home, they made a decision not based on the neighbor's grievances or established codes but the reluctance to subject Mr. Smith to additional time and expense or hardship that were brought on by himself. He said totally ignored was the expense and hardship caused to neighbors, said construction begun 15 years ago, the City has issued permits year after year without progress reports, the owner failed to follow the Municipal Code, property values are now diminished, he has been deprived of significant sunlight once enjoyed, planners discount his family's safety, the Smith's have been gone for over one year from the residence, thieves have tried to break into the home on several occasions, the wishes of one individual should not override the rights of others, rodents and pests live in the vacant house, and Mr. Smith intends to continue to build further. He asked the Council to require removal of all non-permitted structures and force him to comply with the current plans on file in a timely manner. Scott Smith, applicant, said they have tried to establish dialogue with neighbors hoping they can reach agreement, he realizes he is unable to please neighbors and has sought counsel with the City on how to proceed. Efforts to complete the project have been hindered by limitations placed on him through the appeal process, they have completed as much of the integrated portions of City Council Minutes 5 March 4, 2008