Laserfiche WebLink
8.A <br /> Appeal of Issuance of Archite�.ural Perrnit (Residential Use) pag P��,e� 42 <br /> Supplemental Submission /Statement of Reasons or Grounds for the Appeal 10/22/2010 <br /> property ]ine between Applicants and Appellants (the "Pine") — when <br /> reasonable means are readily and practically available to preserve the Pine; <br /> (b) Permission granted to destroy the Pine before Applicants' application is <br /> complete, i.e., before submission and approval of a specific Replacement <br /> Planting Plan; <br /> 2. Permission granted to construct a quarter-circle curved standing seam metal <br /> roof (the "Roof') that is inconsistent, and discordant, with the design and <br /> I curbside appearance of the other houses on Saint Francis Street and in the <br /> immediate and lazger neighborhood; and <br /> 3. Permission granted to construct a rear deck that unnecessarily violates the <br /> privacy of Appellants' bedroom — when reasonable means are readi]y and <br /> practically available to preserve such pravacy. <br /> THE POLICIES AND PR.ACTICES UNDER APPEAL ARE: <br /> 1. The policy and practice of issuing Architectural Permits before the underlying <br /> permit application is complete and has been fully reviewed and approved. <br /> 2. The policy and practice of not giving reasonable weight to, and not adequately <br /> balancing, the legal, equitable, and community interests of all stakeholders <br /> and interested parties in the architectural permit application and review <br /> process. <br /> 3. (a) The policy and practice of permitting healthy urban trees to be removed <br /> by property owners when reasonable means aze available to preserve such � <br /> trees. i <br /> (b) The policy and practice of applying inappropriate, environmentally <br /> unsound standards and methodologies when monetazizing the value of healthy <br /> urban trees. <br /> l <br />