pages: PlanningBoard/2015-06-08.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2015-06-08 | 2 | 7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: 7-A PLN15-0083 - 2615 Buena Vista Avenue - Applicant: Michael Hartigan. An appeal of Design Review approval to allow a second-story addition to a single-family home. The project consists of an approximately 235 sq. ft. second-story addition above an existing attached garage. An approximately 81 sq. ft. First- story addition and second-story deck are also proposed on the west elevation. The proposed project is Categorically Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15301 Existing Facilities. Henry Dong, Planner, gave a description of the project and read letters received from neighbors in support of the project. Board member Zuppan question the lighting and a requirement for motion sensor so light turns off automatically. Mr. Thomas stated that it is not standard, but can be conditioned. Michael Hartigan, Architect, stated that the addition has gone through several iterations and he said that the appellant's drawings misrepresent the project. He mentioned that the windows do not line up and the distance between windows is 14.5 feet, and the view from kitchen angled towards the front. The encroachment is necessary to maintain conditions. Board member Burton stated that the main concern is privacy over the windows. He questioned the need for the side windows with the generous bay window in the front and the existing skylight which should provide ample light, possibly other options without windows or high windows. Mr. Hartigan responded that they considered no windows but it does not meet the aesthetic requirements for historic preservation. He mentioned that art glass is a possibility. He stated that they tried to minimize the windows as much as possible and still maintain historical proportions President Henneberry opened the public comment. Catherine Johnson, appellant, stated that the privacy is being compromised at her property 2609 Buena Vista Avenue. She also stated that the shade does impact her property and the lack of privacy devalues the home. She does not believe there is enough room for the conditioned landscaping "to provide adequate screening." Michael Johnson, appellant, stated that everything is small and there is no room for an addition to the home. Approved Minutes June 8, 2015 Planning Board Meeting Page 2 of 9 | PlanningBoard/2015-06-08.pdf |