Case # 630FSignificance & Compatibility

Review517 Alta

Presented By: Jason LutzCommunity Development Services Director

City Council MeetingAgenda Item #6

September 12, 2016

CASE NO. 630F Consider a request of Nic Abbey LuxuryHomes, owner, for the significance andcompatibility review of the proposed mainstructure located at 517 Alta underDemolition Review Ordinance No. 1860(April 12, 2010) to demolish 100% of theexisting main structure in order to constructa new single family residence with detachedaccessory structure.

SUMMARY The applicant is seeking to demolish

100% of the existing main structure inorder to construct a new single familyresidence with detached accessorystructure.

4

BACKGROUND

Zoned SF-A North side of Alta, between La Jara &

Woodway. Significance Review was approved by the

ARB on 11/18/14 and by Council on12/18/14.

5

BACKGROUND

Council tabled the case until September12, 2016 to give the applicant & adjacentland owners the opportunity to discussissues.

On Monday August 29th City staff metwith the applicant & the legalrepresentative for the Fitzsimons.

6

CONCERNS

Size of the home and the setback of thedetached garage.

Vegetative screening along the rearproperty line.

Privacy issues (line of site from secondstory into rear yard.

Tree Removal (with warranty of other trees) Privacy Fence

7

CONCERNS ADDRESSED

Home Size/Setbacks No modification Setback of current accessory

structure is the same as theproposed accessory structure.

8

CONCERNS ADDRESSED

Vegetative Screening Screening provided along rear property

line (applicants side) and along adjacentland owners property to hide garage.

Garage area not included as area isutilized for drainage.

Proposed vegetation of Cherry Laurel (5),or clumping bamboo (6), or JapaneseYew (6).

9

10

CONCERNS ADDRESSED

Privacy Issues Line of sight not provided Most likely view of backyard would be visible

from 2nd story windows. Minimal view as only 2 windows for light on 2nd

story. (1) bathroom window & (1) 4x5 windowin lounge area.

The proposed windows would beapproximately 80’ from the rear property line.

11

12

13

CONCERNS ADDRESSED

Tree Removal 27” Oak collapsed during heavy rain

around August 20th. No mitigation required for diseased or

collapsed trees. Tree is leaning on existing fences and

deck (hazardous).

14

CONCERNS ADDRESSED

Tree Removal Onsite mitigation - (2) 6.5” cal. Live

Oak or Southern Magnolia and (3) 6.5”cal. Cedar Elms.

32 inches total to be mitigated on site

15

16

CONCERNS ADDRESSED

Tree Removal (Warranty Remaining Trees) Stump Grinding would not be utilized as

roots of Fitzsimons’ trees may beintertwined.

Fitzsimons’ tree is currently showingsigns of stress.

17

CONCERNS ADDRESSED

Tree Removal (Warranty Remaining Trees) No warranty provided. (Not required by

code). Arborist will coordinate with land owners

to ensure proper steps are taken tominimize damage to existing trees.

18

CONCERNS ADDRESSED

Privacy Fence Updated site plan does not show

requested 8’ privacy fence.

19

20

COLLAPSED TREE

21

COLLAPSED TREE

22

COLLAPSED TREE

23

COLLAPSEDTREE

24

COLLAPSEDTREE

QUESTIONS?