Laserfiche WebLink
� <br /> 8.A <br /> Page 117 <br /> Appeal of Issuance of Architectural Permit Page 9 of 13 <br /> 448 Saint Francis St. <br /> Project No. AP-2010-9 �I <br /> i <br /> using Google's free SketchUp or some other readily available drawing program, , <br /> which would have enabled the Planning Department and the neighbors to have a <br /> clearer understandin� of the appearance of the Roof and its interaction with the <br /> neighborhood. <br /> Conclusions of Fact and Law that Appellants would have Demonstrated: The Planning <br /> Department failed in its duty (a) to follow the Guidelines, (b) to require Apglicants to <br /> subnut adequate drawings that would have permitted the Planning Department, <br /> Appellants, and other neighbors to understand the impact of the Roof in context, and (c) <br /> to balance the desire of the property owner with the rights, needs, and interests of the <br /> adjoining and nearby property owners, of the neighborhood, and of all residents of <br /> Redwood City by unreasonably authorizing the construction of a quarter-round standing <br /> seam metal roof that is discordant with the nei�hborhood's dominant roof styles, thereby <br /> degrading a valuable element of the streetscape and the neighborhood. <br /> 3. Appellants would have identified one or more architects and urban planners who <br /> would have testified orally or in writing that the Applicants' objective of creating a large, <br /> vaulted interior space could also have been achieved by slightly modifying the Roof <br /> design to preserve its essential curved form, but to do so with a series of two, three, or <br /> more adjoining flat planes that would have created the circular feel and appearance <br /> (somewhat analogous to the way calculus defines a circle as a series of adjoining flat <br /> planes). <br /> ' a. By doing this, a wide variety of architecturally interesring metal shingles <br /> could be applied to the Roof, bringing it much more into harmony with existing <br /> roofs in the neighborhood, while still permitting Applicants to have the economic, <br /> safety, and environmental benefits of a metal roof. <br /> b. In making this truly minor modification with respect to Applicants' desired <br /> interior space, the benefits to the Appellants — who would look directly look into <br /> the lar�e (approximately. 55' long by at least 10' high), unbroken, imposing <br /> surface of Applicants' Roof fi the kitchen, bathroom, and second <br />