AgdaPkt 2002-11-18 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

RESOLUTION 14474 APPROVING APPLICATION FOR MAIN STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT B. A public hearing on an appeal of an Architectural Permit at 366 Hillview Avenue; Principal Planner Jany explained the requirements for an Amhitectural Permit to be granted. He stated that the design review is governed by a general set of standards located in Article 45 of the Zoning Ordinance. A slide presentation was used to explain the proposed addition and exhibit the site plan. In summary, staff reviewed an application for an expansion of a home, the home met the required criteria, staff sees no significant impact and has approved similar projects in the past. Council asked various questions of staff. Mayor Claire opened the public hearing. Sue Marek, appellant made her presentation of the appeal stating that it is based on the City Zoning Ordinance amhitectural standards, Article 45.8, Item C. She used various slides to exhibit the reasons and concerns related to the proposal. As stated in Ms. Marek's letter of appeal dated October 23, 2002, the following were the reasons and concerns: 1) The structure does not conform; 2) the Viviani's have many options; 3) the Planning Department is using an incorrect basis for comparison; 4) additional relevant issues; and 5) summary. Patricia Mahoney stated that her and her husband reside across the street that was renovated and made a very firm decision to keep it to one story, incorporating a design that they felt kept within the character of the neighborhood. She urged the Council to reconsider the approval of the permit and encourage a proposal that would be more compatible with the surrounding homes. Ceci Ellis stated she is a realtor and has lived and sold properties in the neighborhood for many years. She stated her concern is that the house does not conform to the neighborhood because it strongly resembles a multi-family home in her opinion. She further stated that if the house is built in the proposed form it will hurt property values for the rest of the neighborhood. Natalie Roselli stated that this is a non-conformity issue because the addition will be two stories far back into the lot and the privacy in her backyard will be destroyed and significantly impacted in many others' backyards. She stated she strongly supports the right of property owners to change their home, but that it is also important to consider the rights of the neighborhood to have privacy. Michael Viviani, the applicant, stated that the report explains that the project is in compliance with all applicable City zoning ordinances. He further stated that he and his wife are not asking for any variance, just to increase the living space on REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 28, 2002 MINUTES PAGE 6