AgdaPkt 2011-03-21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

6.1A Page 12 qualifications and time the City has had. He found the report is incomplete. He questioned how an individual can prepare himself in such a short amount of time. Mayor Ira opened the Public Hearing, Gary Martin he spoke in favor of the applicant building his house. John Spotorno, Architectural Review Committee (ARC) Member, said he is speaking on his own behalf, not as an ARC member, and he is not being financia[ly compensated. He said he is an architect he spoke in favor of the application moving forward. Abdel Ismail said he is a resident and an architect who has built several homes in Redwood City and that he has received beautification awards for those buildings. He spoke in favor of the proposed project and made a suggestion for the appellant to utilize landscaping to address concerns about privacy. Kristi Osborn said she lives directly behind and down the hill from the project and opined that the applicant and City had given more than sufficient notification to the neighbors. She is not concerned with any additional privacy issue as opposed to the current situation. She spoke in favor of the project and generally fixing up the neighborhood. M/S Seybert/Gee to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried 7-0 by voice vote. A Council Member had a question about the streetscape and replacement size of the tree, if removed. Mr. Lyon said the o�cial notice of action references the tree removal and replacement processes via Public Works. Other questions and discussion were about the roof, its scale and visibility from the street, and the concern about privacy even though the City is not required to address this. He noted that the applicant came up with design concessions through work with the PCRC (Public Conflict Resolution Center). Several Council Members and Mr. Lyon spoke about the PCRC meetings (Public Conflict Resolution Center) attended by the appellant, concerned neighbors, City staff, the applicant, and PCRC staff. The discussions at these meetings were summarized and finalized into minutes and has become part of the public zoning administration record. The applicant had made some concessions. One Council Member had questions about the specific criteria involved in the tree removal permit process, the outcomes, and studying what other communities have done. Mr. Lyon reviewed the process in detail and noted that it is laid out in chapter 35 of the municipal code. Another Council Member also expressed interest in a study session with the Planning Commission on what other communities have done in considering things like individual neighborhood character, privacy, and property rights. In light of some legal questions, City Attorney Thompson reviewed the appeal process in detail and confirmed that Mr. Warsowe was given additional time because a document that was handed out had incorrect information on it about when he could provide information and it created the JOINT CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD November 22, 2010 MEETING MINUTES PAGE 10