AgdaPkt 2002-10-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

IREPOR T ~o the Honorable Mayor and City Council From the City Manager October 28, 2002 Subject Appeal of an Architectural Permit at 366 Hillview Avenue. Recommendation Uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator to approve the Architectural Permit. Background On August 22, 2002, the Zoning Administrator approved an Architectural Permit for a first and second story addition to an existing single family dwelling located at 366 Hillview Avenue (please refer to The Notice of Official Action and project plans). The proposed addition consists of a 486 square foot first floor expansion (which would connect to an existing detached 2-car garage) and a 939 square foot second story addition. The Zoning Administrator determined the proposed project conforms to all requirements of Article 45 (Architectural Permits) ofthe Zoning Ordinance and Article 5, the "R-1" (Residential-single family dwelling) zoning district (Eagle Hill Neighborhood) in which the property is located. On August 19, 2002, the neighbor at 346 Hillview Avenue (immediately adjacent to the West), appealed the decision of the Zoning Administrator (please refer to the attached letter dated August 29, 2002). The appellant's reasons and concerns are summarized as follows: · The residences on this block are predominantly single-story. · The homes on this side of the block (South side) have similar footprints and all the homes' rear walls line up. This alignment creates a view corridor. · The applicant's proposal will extent beyond the footprints of the other homes on the block and will compromise the appellant's privacy and reduce the view of the hills. · The proposal is awkward in design and could be improved upon. Mediation Prior to formally applying for their architectural permit, the applicants informed Planning Staff that their proposal was not acceptable to the appellant. Planning Staff recommended some possible ideas to make the proposal acceptable (moving windows, planting tall hedge trees, recessing the second story, etc.). Before applying for an Architectural Permit, the applicants changed a conventional set of windows to "clerestory windows" (windows located above eye- level) to address the appellant's privacy concerns. Additionally, the applicants revised their plans by recessing the proposed second story back four feet along the Western fa(~ade, which abuts the appellant's property. These concessions made by the applicants did not completely satisfy their neighbor and an appeal was filed. The parties were referred to the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center (PCRC) in the hope that both neighbors would establish a dialogue and reach a compromise, The mediation was unsuccessful,