3A Public Hearing 2008 0707 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Excerpts of Board of Zoning Adjustments Regular Meeting April 17, 2008 Minute No. 2008-OS Page 6 of 7 Secretary Penaranda replied that a detached single-family dwelling was not permitted in the DA District, unlike Mulford Gardens. The DA District allowed asingle-family house, atwo- family duplex or a multifamily structure, but no combination thereof. His suggestion would amount to two single-family homes on one lot. Dennis Christian, Sharon Christian's husband, could not understand the problem. The City wanted development in this area, it was zoned for this kind of project, this design was the only one the City would allow them to do and it seemed that all kinds of barriers had been put in front of them. The parameters of this project met all of the City guidelines. "What's the problem?" Chair Goldt replied that the City had not thrown up roadblocks, because staff had recommended approval. However, the neighbors could not be held hostage. They, too, had the right to state their concerns. Mr. Christian questioned the shade and height renderings that his neighbor had shown on her PowerPoint presentation. Who knew if they were right or not? He believed that at least one Board Member had decided against the project and it was very frustrating. Member Marr asked the applicant to not presume how she would vote or what her thinking was. Mr. Christian apologized. Loretta Franke Woolston, Peter Woolston's wife, stated that she was concerned about how this project would affect their property, as well as their neighbors' property. Being in the shade all day long "was a pretty bad situation." She suggested the applicant pay for an independent consultant to perform a study on the shade issue. She believed that the many new, young homeowners in the neighborhood would agree that they did not want to see more apartment-type buildings coming into the neighborhood. Mr. Filipovich agreed with Mr. Woolston's comments concerning the story poles and the connecting lines. In his opinion, whether the full Board was in attendance did not make any difference, because four votes were still needed to approve the project. He stated the proposed addition was too high and no one knew how wind, rain and cold weather would affect all the residents in the area after the building was constructed. He suggested an insurance agent be consulted to find out the cost of insurance to cover what might happen if the project moved forward. Now was- the time to vote, one way or another. Whoever was dissatisfied with the decision "would have to refile, again." This was a problem that could not be solved to the satisfaction of both parties. Motion to Close the Public Hearing (Shields/Marr); 4 Ayes, 0 Noes, 3 Absent-Daly, Pearson, Sidari) Chair Goldt believed that, even though this area was zoned for this kind of addition, it did not make it appropriate. "Quite frankly, if I were the next door neighbor, I would be so unhappy." There were other ways to accomplish what the applicant wished. She was not in favor of this project.