pages: PlanningBoard/2006-05-22.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2006-05-22 | 7 | Ms. Pudell replied that staff met with the applicant and Mr. McCarver, but did not reach a resolution. Member Lynch noted that the in this particular neighborhood, there were homes with second stories, and he interpreted this impasse as an inability of the neighbors to discuss the issues and develop a modified plan. He cautioned the speakers from using the term "takings," which is a legal term that has very specific meanings with respect to case law. He did not believe that term applied in this case. He believed this was a design issue, and he would like to continue this item to allow the neighbors to come to an understanding about a modified plan before the Board makes a decision. He believed the applicant was within her rights to add a second story, which was a normal part of urban living. He added that the neighbors had a right to comment on that design, to question it and to try to come to an agreement. President Cunningham agreed with Member Lynch's comments, and would like the neighbors to attempt to resolve this issue. Member Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with Member Lynch's comments. She added that she was troubled by the statement in the staff report that this project was compatible with neighboring homes, across a four-lane street. She noted that every house on Washington Court was a two one-story house, so there was a difference in scale. In walking and driving this street, she believed the expansion was a substantial one. Member Mariani noted that she was very familiar with this area, and did not believe the project fit well in the neighborhood. She understood Mr. McCarver's frustration and believed that it was overwhelming that there were only two people on the street who did not oppose the addition. She hoped the applicant would modify the design. Member Kohlstrand agreed with Member Lynch's comments, and acknowledged that there were additional shadows cast on the back of the property during morning hours. She noted that it was unfortunate that the two property owners had not been able to work their differences out. She would recommend that the property owners try to reach a compromise. Member McNamara agreed with Member Kohlstrand's views on this issue, and believed the project as designed would not conform to the findings necessary for approval. She noted that there would be significant shading on the living part of Mr. McCarver's home. She hoped the two parties could reach a workable compromise. Vice President Cook agreed with the previous comments, and would like to see a compromise reached. She was not in favor of effectively downzoning the property by saying a second story could not be built unless the whole block was willing to do the same. President Cunningham noted that Vice President Cook had touched on a vital point regarding the rights of property owners to expand their homes, and did not believe the Board should deny an application just because a group of neighbors rebelled against the applicant's desire to expand their home. He would like to see a compromise between the two parties. Planning Board Minutes Page 7 May 22, 2006 | PlanningBoard/2006-05-22.pdf |