RTC 03-083 Attachment 8

2002-0935 - Appeal of a decision by the Administrative Hearing Officer denying a Variance for a single-story addition that exceeds the maximum allowable lot coverage of 40%. The property is located on a 7,810 square foot site located at 973 The Dalles Avenue in an R-1 (Low-Density Residential) Zoning District (APN: 320-21-022)

Kelly Diekmann, Project Planner, presented the staff report. He gave an overview of the result of the Administrative Hearing. He provided a summary of the proposed application highlighting the use, site layout, and architecture. Staff was unable to make the required findings and that there is no exceptional situation to warrant approval of the Variance. He commented that staff maintains the same recommendation to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Administrative Hearing Officer denying the Variance.

Comm. Moylan asked staff what is the distance from the project to require recusal. Senior Assistant City Attorney Borger responded it is 500 feet from the property.

Comm. Swegles asked staff what is the lot size and FAR of the two-story residential next door. Staff responded per the assessor's report, it is 23% lot coverage with a lot size of 7,800 square feet.

Chair Simons opened the public hearing.

Nurit Shor, applicant/owner, presented photographs of the surrounding neighborhood noting that when she purchased the property she did not realize that the utility lines would be an eye sore and now she would like to screen the view. She stated that she explored several alternatives to cover the view and that she spoke to her neighbors who supported her design. She noted that she did not design a second story addition as it would be a higher FAR. She expressed her desire to enjoy her backyard without the view of the utility lines.

Vice Chair Babcock asked the applicant if she explored the idea of planting a tree to cover the view instead of going through a variance. The applicant responded no.

Mike Honey, neighbor, read a letter in support of the project. He commented that the applicant has enhanced the appearance of the neighborhood. He stated that he was able to find three reasons to grant the Variance - 1) it is a few square feet addition to achieve a high value with little cost, 2) there is no significant impact to the neighborhood. If anything it is a better living condition at no cost to the neighborhood. The applicant is not building up who should be commended for her efforts avoiding encroaching on the neighbors. He also added that it is a hardship for the applicant not to be able to enjoy her property. He urged the Commission to support the will of the neighbors and approve the Variance and Design Review.

Nurit Shor, applicant, noted the letters of support from the neighbors which is attached in the staff report which find the design satisfactory. She stated that she wants to stay in the 42% FAR and the lot is smaller than the standard.

Chair Simons closed the public hearing.

Comm. Moylan commented that it is tough to grant a Variance as it requires making the three findings. He noted that the appellant stated that the lot is substandard with the view of the utility pole. He stated that the view is common and not an unusual situation. He was unable to make the required Finding number one, was able to make Finding number two but cannot make Finding number three. He concurred with staff with not making the required findings.

Comm. Chu concurred with Comm. Moylan about the utility pole being a common view and not being an unusual situation. He recommended a slightly smaller addition in keeping with the required FAR with a narrower room that could block the view of the utility pole.

Ms. Ryan stated that the decision is final unless appealed to City Council within the 15-day appeal period.

Return to RTC# 03-083