Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Design Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board continues contested Carolina Street project to June 3, asks parties to negotiate reductions
Summary
Neighbors opposed a proposed, large single‑family house at 910 Carolina Street, citing massing, loss of light and procedural concerns about Planning Commission packet distribution. The board continued the matter to June 3 and asked the parties and Planning staff to work on stepped‑back alternatives and removal of a roof deck.
Neighbors of 910 Carolina Street appealed a Planning Commission approval for a large single‑family house that would rise three stories in front and four levels in the rear on a down‑sloping lot. Appellants Dorothy Larson and Peggy Snyder argued the design is out of scale with the block, fails to step with topography and the Planning Commission process omitted neighbors’ letters from the commissioners’ packets before deliberation.
The permit holder’s counsel submitted revised plans the day of the hearing that increase the rear building wall setback by roughly 3 feet; counsel said other concessions (removal of one unit and reduction in overall height from an earlier proposal) had already been made. Planning staff acknowledged an earlier oversight in rear‑yard averaging calculations and accepted the revised plans submitted during the meeting as addressing the calculation error.
Faced with strong public turnout and sharply divided views, President Anne Lazarus moved to continue the item to June 3. The board directed the Planning Department’s residential design team to assist negotiations, focusing on stepped setbacks at upper levels, elimination or modification of the roof deck and other design changes intended to reduce bulk and preserve mid‑block open space and light. The motion to continue passed unanimously (5‑0).
What’s next: Parties were asked to meet with Planning staff and produce revised plans or design alternatives for the June 3 hearing; commissioners signaled preference for stepped massing, greater setbacks on upper floors and alternatives to a roof deck or stair penthouse.
