Laserfiche WebLink
' - Gundlach stated she does i�ot have an eaact calculation of the patio's area but that sl�e is recommending a reduction of 200 <br /> square feet. <br /> Chair Rahn asked for public comments on this application. <br /> There were no public comments. <br /> Capra commented he lias recently driven lround the city and observed the construction that is going on in this area. Capra <br /> stated in his view he is not attempting to do anything more than the other property owners that are undergoing renovation at the <br /> present time. Capra stated his current residence is an eyesore and has not been used in three to four years. Capra indicated he <br /> would like to i�nprove the appearance of the property. <br /> Kempf stated in his opinion the first issue to discuss is whether this is a remodel or a rebuild,and that in his opinion this project <br /> is close to the 50 peccent,but that he would consider it a remodel rather than a rebuild. <br /> Rahn commented he does not feel that people who remodel should be rewarded over new construction,noting that the new <br /> residence was recently denied at a 30 percent limit. Rahn pointed out the proposed new footprint is almost twice as large as <br /> what currently exists. Rahn stated the main issue in most of these applications is the amount of l�ardcover on the property. <br /> Alexander stated the reason for raising the roof is that the heigl�t oftlie ceiling on tt�e main floor is 7.8',wtiich is substandard, <br /> with an attached garage being added. <br /> Rahn stated according to the discussions at the last Planning Commission meeting,he does not feel this c�ualifies as a remodel. <br /> Rahn stated the applicant is not allowed to expand the nonconformity. <br /> Alexander inquired whetl�er the garage is being considered as part of the new addition. <br /> Raltn inquired whether the attaclied garage is the same size as the eaisting detached garage. <br /> Capra stated it is slightly larger. Capra noted the current hardcover on this lot is 49 percent and that this proposal is a major <br /> improvement. Capra stated the 25 percent limit is unrealistic given the price of the lot and that he has eliminated whatever he <br /> possibly can. Capra indicated he would prefer to construct the new residence at 30 percent rather than remodel. <br /> Winkey stated the P.lanning Commission has struggled in the past with what constitutes a remodel project versus a rebuild. <br /> Winkey inquired if there are any prices that the City has on this project. _ <br /> Gundlach stated slie l�as not done a price per square foot calculation but that 1,584 square feet exist currently and 1,050 square <br /> feet is being added. Gundlach stated the existing second story is not going to be eapanded except for a batlu•oom and a storage <br /> area will be added above the garage. Gundlach stated in her opinion this project is borderluie for being considered a remodel. <br /> Winlcey stated in his opinion the value of the remodel project would e�ceed 50 percent of the value of the residence and should <br /> be considered a rebuild. <br /> Bremer cited a previous situation where a property owner was allowed to add a secoild stoiy where none existed,add one foot <br /> to the first story,aud add an attached garage. <br /> Curtis stated in that situation the garage was not attached Uut that the ceiling height was raised in a portion of the existing <br /> residence,witl�a half-story addition being added. Cui�tis noted the Plaiu�ing Conunission would be discussing that application <br /> later at tonight's meeting due to some issues thlt have arisen. <br /> Gaffi•on stated the properly owner in that situation has determined after-the-fact that the foundation is basically worthless and <br /> that veiy little of the original house will remain following the construction. <br /> Rahn stated he has a difficult tiine approving a i•emodeling project when the size of the footprint is almost being doubled. <br /> 5 <br />