CCMIN060308 - Laserfiche WebLink

along First Street which were 25 to 30 feet in height which are consistent with the downtown guidelines and architectural style and how they fit into the area. Ms. Decker said the applicant has provided staff with an opportunity to allow the existing units to stay as is; however, any additions to those units would need to meet the new development standards. If the homes were to be raised and new construction placed on either of the parcels, they would need to meet development standards and setbacks. Councilmember Cook-Kallio clarified that the Council can consider this and modify it, where, if there were second stories added, they could maintain the same footprint along the structure; however, the new development standards would need to be met if there were new construction. Ms. Decker said therefore, staff recommends the City Council find that the proposed PUD development is consistent with the general plan and purposes of the PUD Ordinance, that the Council make the PUD findings as listed in the Planning Commission staff report and introduce the draft ordinance. Councilmember Sullivan confirmed the front house was built in 1895 and that the PUD would allow renovation of it within guidelines or reconstruction. He also confirmed the heights of the two open-air type carports would fall under the accessory structure guidelines at a maximum of 15 feet. Ms. Decker said what is being proposed for the carports is 9'8"; however, the heights could go up to 15 feet if a future owner reconstructed it. Vice Mayor Thorne confirmed with Ms. Decker that the process staff recommended to modify any of the buildings would be at a staff level design review under the PUD minor modification process. The Planning Commission recommended that each addition come before the Planning Commission for decision, which would be a change to the PUD minor modification process. She said any action could be appealed to the City Council, but it would presumably end at the Planning Commission and not at staff level review. Councilmember McGovern said the Council has a choice to use both what the Planning Commission and staff has recommended and make changes that might be a compromise. She disclosed she visited the site, looked at both houses and those adjacent to them, and said the size of the lots were large. She questioned whether if adding something between 25 to 28 feet could suffice for a nice addition to the two houses, and Ms. Decker said yes, as it would be consistent with homes along Second Street where there have been second story additions. Councilmember McGovern confirmed a 25% FAR would provide the ability to add square footage, and each house would still be below 2,000 square feet. She said she liked the house, felt it was architecturally significant and supported going the Planning Commission's review if an applicant wanted to tear down the house or modify it. Councilmember McGovern referred to the 5 foot access easement in front of the house, agreed that the work done along Second Street and Kottinger is nice work with new sidewalks, and questioned the need for the 5 feet. Ms. Decker said the Engineering Department indicated that there should be consistency in having the same width of right-of-way. In the future, there may be a need to have Kottinger widened for turn lanes or other reasons that staff has not yet considered at this time. Councilmember McGovern believed that this would significantly cut into the walkway of the home and make a difference with the front yard. City Manager Fialho noted that the Council should be mindful that the City would need to acquire the property if the road needed to be widened for aturn-lane in the future. City Council Minutes 8 June 3, 2008