CC_Minutes_2017_0522 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, May 22, 2017 Page 3 City Manager Trudgeon noted that adjacent neighbors had been contacted by staff and welcomed to attend the initial administrative hearing before staff, but was un- sure if any had attended. Mr. Lloyd advised that the neighbor appealing the administrative ruling had been unable to attend the hearing, but had received information from staff before and the results of the hearing, resulting in tonight's appeal. At the request of Chair Roe, Mr. Lloyd confirmed that the existing and proposed front elevations were available during staff's review; along with the outline of the original garage and proposed roof lines. Member Willmus stated his understanding of the proposed roof style over the ad- dition was made in an effort to accommodate the neighbor to the east; but asked staff if any discussion had been held with the proposed project to match roof lines on both ends of the house versus gable style on one end and hip style on the other, opining that those choices seemed to create an oddball situation. Mr. Lloyd reported that staff would typically expect similar styles, but that the application had come to staff in this way from the homeowner when applying for the deviation with builders included in the conversation with directly adjacent neighbors and their concern about shade on their garden in the side yard, There- fore, in deference to that neighbor's concern, Mr. Lloyd advised that staff had ac- cepted the proposed roof style as a viable option that matched the neighboring house as well, with the nearest other roof of the hip style even though it didn't match the gable style roof on the other end of the subject home. Member Willmus asked if there were any similar roofs in the neighborhood that had two different roof styles, with Mr. Lloyd reported that he was not aware of any. Chair Roe invited the Appealing Party to present their case at this time. Appealing Party,Ray Werner, 688 W Sexton Avenue Mr. Werner stated that his biggest problem is shading his garden area, and also the closer proximity of the addition to his home, impacting an existing garden and creating potential drainage issues. While realizing the neighbor has a right to do so, Mr. Werner stated his opposition with this occurring after having lived there for over forty-four years and now all of a sudden a new neighbor of only 4-5 years desires a double garage even though he knew the limited garage space when orig- inally purchasing the home. With the assistance of staff, Mr. Werner presented pictures of the existing space and property lines; reiterating that he was not happy with the proposed change, including his ability to sell his home in the future with this addition resembling a barracks being so close to his property line. Property Owner, Case Meyerding, 694 Sextant Avenue N