2003-0096 - Application for a Design Review on a 6,004 square foot site to allow a second-story addition to a single-family home resulting in a 57% FAR (Floor Area Ratio) where 45% FAR is allowed without Planning Commission Review. The property is located at 803 Haverhill Drive in an R-0 (Low-Density Residential) Zoning District. (APN: 201-09-033)

Erin Walters, Project Planner, presented the staff report. Staff provided a summary of the proposed project, highlighting the site layout, architecture, parking and landscaping. She noted the applicant’s efforts in meeting with the neighborhood and receiving support. Staff was able to make the required findings and recommended approval of the Design Review.

Comm. Satterlee commented that the rear elevation appears to be flat. Staff said yes.

Comm. Satterlee asked about minimizing the privacy impact of the rear windows. Staff responded that the rear window would have foliage to provide screening.

Comm. Satterlee asked staff if the foliage is mature. Staff responded that the trees are taller than the existing building of approximately 20 feet.

Comm. Moylan asked staff if the second story design is defined with the existing first story. Staff said yes.

Kathy Haynes, applicant, stated that she worked closely with staff and the neighbors. She stated that they try to maintain the existing structure of the house and minimize the impacts to the neighborhood. She concluded that the proposed design meets the development standards and urged approval of the project.

Comm. Satterlee asked the applicant how did the design of large and little window design come about. Ms. Haynes responded that the idea is to break out the façade with the small windows for the bathroom and the larger window for the master bedroom.

Comm. Moylan expressed his desire to see more of the 3-D attachments.

Comm. Chu asked the applicant if he plans on installing two fireplaces. Ms. Haynes responded that she only plans on adding one more since there is already an existing fireplace.

Pat Grennan, resident, that she is pleased with the proactive efforts of the applicant and to be a part of the process. She supported the applicant's project.

Rick Hartman, architect, availed himself to Planning Commission’s questions.

Comm. Satterlee asked about the window placement being asymmetric. Mr. Hartman explained the symmetry and with the step back, the sills will go up.

Comm. Chu asked the architect why the north elevation windows appear unbalance and that the concentration is to the left. Mr. Hartman responded that the window size is the same and also the placement is dictated by the furniture placements.

Sam Wong, next door neighbor, expressed his privacy concerns and that although there are trees, the applicant can still see their backyard.

Ira Haynes, applicant, thanked the Commission for the opportunity. He acknowledged the privacy concerns expressed by the neighbors but state that there is existing greenery to the side to serve as screen. He added that the windows are placed strategically to delineate privacy impact. He said that he is happy to plant some more foliage to address the privacy concerns. He urged approval of his project.

Comm. Swegles commented that during his site visit, he was pleased with the proposed design even though it is with a higher FAR. He was also pleased that the applicants worked with their neighbors and received letters of support.

Comm. Chu also commented that during his site visit, the proposed design would fit in well with the neighborhood and that it was an excellent design.

Comm. Moylan supported the motion and stated that he was able to make the required findings. He noted that the second story setbacks are within the existing first story lot line.