pages: PlanningBoard/2007-01-08.pdf, 11
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2007-01-08 | 11 | 8-C. Appeal of Major Design Review Approval - DR06-0064 - Applicant/Appellant: Grace Villa 1811 Eighth Street (DB). The property owner is appealing a condition of Design Review approval that requires the removal of a driveway gate that reduces access to required parking in a detached two-car garage. The site is located within an R-2, Two-Family Residential Zoning District. The public hearing was reopened. Mr. Calpestri noted that he and Mr. Brighton had agreed to disagree, and that the sticking point was the need for an automatic opener or operator on the gate. He resisted the idea of an operator due to its expense, which could approach $2,500, and another $1,000 for installation. He requested that the Board support the first alternative given in the staff report, without providing an operator. In response to an inquiry by President Lynch regarding the necessity of an operator, Mr. Brighton replied that it encouraged the use of the on-site parking. Ms. Susan Villa, noted that she was representing her mother Grace Villa (the applicant). She noted that her mother was 82 years old, and has become increasingly frail. She had lived in this home since 1947, and it was her hope to stay there. She and her eight siblings would like this expansion to be approved SO that caregivers and other family members may be accommodated there in order to care for their mother. Her mother had experienced several frightening incidents when people came up the driveway. This, combined with her age and decreasing sight, had made her quite fearful, and she was adamant that she would like a gate. She noted that her mother did not own a vehicle, and noted that there would be one vehicle at the house from either a caregiver or a family member. She did not believe it would be a problem to use the gate and gain access to the garage. She understood the concern about offstreet parking, and believed this would not contribute to the problem. In response to an inquiry by President Lynch whether she would agree to the alternative which called for a five-foot-high iron/steel fence, Ms. Villa replied that she would not be opposed to that alternative. The public hearing was closed for Board discussion. Member Ezzy Ashcraft inquired about the public policy or rationale requiring the gate to be see- through She believed that it would be a common-sense solution to have the gate swing toward the front of the house, rather toward the side of the house, which would impede the driveway. She believed that people should be encouraged to improve their homes, especially the older homes. She also wanted to support older residents in being able to stay in their homes as long as possible. In response to an inquiry by President Lynch regarding the idea that having an operator was an onerous condition, Mr. Brighton replied that the floor area was being doubled with more bedrooms and bathrooms. He believed the additional $2,500-$3,000 in light of the major construction investment was a minor consideration for the long-term use of the property, and the long-term benefit of the community to have offstreet parking. Planning Board Minutes Page 11 January 8, 2007 | PlanningBoard/2007-01-08.pdf |