Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Res 1990-06-20 (4) RESOLUTION NO. 2716 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON UPHOLDING THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DECISION DENYING APPROVAL OF NEW RESIDENCE AT 338 BLACKFIELD DRIVE WHEREAS, on May 10, 1990, after hearings held on April 12, 1990 and May 10, 1990, the Design Review Board denied approval of a proposed residence at 338 Blackfield Drive, and WHEREAS, on May 16, 1990, the applicant appealed the matter to the Town Council, and WHEREAS, on June 6,1990 a public hearing was held on the appeal. Testimony was received from Jan Emery, Robert Holm, Michael Lyon, Tim Patton and Ken Cohen in support of the appeal. Testimony was received from Marsha Norris and Dana Yarger in opposition to the appeal. This testimony is accurately summarized in the adopted minutes of the Council's June 6, 1990 meeting. Also speaking to explain the deliberations of the Board was Margjt Aramburu. At this hearing, architects renderings and plans of the proposed structure were shown to and reviewed by the Town Council. The Council has read, reviewed and considered the minutes of the April 12, 1990 and May 10, 1990 Board meetings, the staff report, written communications to the Council and the testimony received, and WHEREAS, having considered the information contained in the staff report, the architects renderings and plans, the testimony received, and the above noted minutes and action of the Design Review Board, and based on the above, the Town Council finds and determines as follows: 1. Section 11.1 (B) of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance states that the purpose of design review is "... to promote the orderly development of the Town, the preservation of its unique visual character, the stability of land values and investment, the public safety and the general welfare, by preventing the erection of structures or additions and alterations thereto ... of unsightly or obnoxious appearance or which are not properly related to their sites, adjacent uses, and traffic circulation in the vicinity ..." 2. Section 11.1 (E) of the Zoning Ordinance states that during the course of site plan and architectural approval, "...review and approval ... shall be directed to the following considerations: 1. The proposed location of the structure on its site in relation to the location of buildings on adjoining sites, with particular attention to view considerations, privacy, and topographic or other constraints on development imposed by particular site conditions. 3. The size or bulk of the proposed building in relation to the character of existing buildings in the vicinity. The relationship of a building to its surroundings may be of greater importance that the quality of design of the individual structure. 3. The Council finds that the house is required to be, but is not, harmonious with the existing homes at the end of Blackfield Drive. The proposed house has a floor area of 3,650 square feet plus a 552 square foot garage on a 14,810 square foot, relatively flat lot. The lot is 87 feet wide, and the proposed house is 65 feet wide. This lot is a relatively small lot for this neighborhood, and therefore requires a house that relates better to its lot. Fifty-three existing homes in the vicinity average 3400 square feet in size; 12 approved homes in the vicinity, generally on larger lots than this one, average 4300 square feet in size. The Council finds that the more recently approved homes are out of character with the 53 existing homes. The size and width of this proposal is out of character with, is not harmonious with and does not conform with its surroundings and does not relate well to the street. The Council finds that this house design as submitted is too massive and too wide for this lot and does not interface properly with the street or with the existing neighborhood as well as the approved but not yet built houses in the neighborhood. Furthermore the perceived bulk and mass from surrounding lots and houses exceeds the hillside guidelines. 4. The Council further finds that the house can and should be narrowed somewhat on this lot with respect to Blackfield Drive so that upon build out of this subdivision it is less likely that the streetscape presents a solid mass of housing. 5. The Council further finds that this design fills too much of the building envelope, and determines that it is not, and never was the intent of t~e Ring Mountain subdivision that the building envelopes be filled with or define the ultimate size of the structure. 6. The above findings require a determination that the proposal as submitted on appeal cannot be approved. Based on the above findings the appeal is denied. However, the Council further finds that this design should not be considered unacceptable, but rather in need of refinement so as to more closely satisfy the requirements of neighborhood compatibility and the hillside guidelines. For this reason, the Council believes that the applicant should modify the design, and resubmit it to the DRB for its consideration and possible approval. In the event the applicant returns to the DRB for further refinement, this application, and the appeal, is denied without prejudice and jurisdiction to reconsider this item is returned to the DRB. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based on the findings set forth above, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon finds that this house does not satisfy the guiding principles of the Design Review ordinance, and therefore, the appeal of this matter is denied, and the decision of the Design Review Board is upheld, without prejudice. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on .Tune 20, 1990 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Friedman, Coxhead, Thayer, Kuhn, Logan NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ATTEST: ~/~ +M~d~ THERESE M. ENNESSY, T CLERK