pages: PlanningBoard/2012-02-13.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2012-02-13 | 5 | Vice President Autorino stated that he went to visit the property and he asked if the back end of the house is up to the grassy area or over the grassy area. Mr. Thomas stated that the back end of the house goes to the edge of the grass. President Ezzy Ashcraft asked whether the house that burned down on the site had a unit at the back of the building. Leslie Shubin, resident of 2000 Clinton Avenue, explained that there was no unit behind the house. Board member Henneberry asked about the difference in square footage from the old house to the new proposed development. Mr. Thomas stated that the proposal is substantially larger since the older house was a 2- bedroom unit and the new proposal is a 3-bedroom unit. Board member Knox White asked about the parcel's history. Mr. Thomas replied that the new owner purchased the property after the original house burned. The new owner approached the City and explained that he wanted to build in the same configuration as the previous home. The Planning Department then told him that he would not be able to build in the desired configuration because there was an easement on the seawall. The property owner then came back with a different configuration where both units would be under one building, the house would be narrower, and parking would be provided on either side of the house. Under that configuration, the house would require two curb cuts, but the City couldn't allow two curb cuts for a single property. Dick Rutter, Alameda based architect and resident of 2205 Clinton Avenue, stated that he disagreed with the design proposal and more thought should go into the revision, especially with the parking design. Christopher Buckley, VP of the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society, presented a letter on behalf of the organization. He explained that the organization believed that the design needs major revision and the building proposal is not compatible with the rest of the neighboring buildings and does not comply with the City Council's design review manual, the Guide for Residential Design. He also explained that the drawings lacked sufficient details and the two floor plans need further clarification. Leslie Shubin, neighbor to the project applicant, stated that her residence's dimensions are 30' feet wide by 45' feet deep and the 2004 Clinton Avenue proposal goes back 63' feet. Thus, the proposed house will block her sunlight and view of the lagoon towards the East. She explained that there is a way to modify the proposal without interfering with her house and she does not believe that the proposed design will fit well with the neighborhood. President Ezzy Ashcraft called for the Board to comment and asked the Board to call for a motion to continue the discussion about the proposal. Approved Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 15 February 13, 2012 | PlanningBoard/2012-02-13.pdf |