Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 805 Margo Street topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves 805 Margo Street with conditions after neighbors raise privacy and noise concerns
Summary
After neighbors raised privacy and noise concerns, the design board granted project design approval for 805 Margo Street with conditions requiring roofing/drainage details, a landscape plan and material choices for driveway planters; two minor zoning exceptions (hedge height and garage height) were noted.
The Single-Family Design Board granted project design approval for a two-story addition and garage conversion at 805 Margo Street, imposing conditions on drainage, roofing and landscaping after neighbors raised concerns during public comment.
Presenter Liz Hughes, representing architect Tom Ochsner and owners Lisa and Manu Singh, described design revisions made since the project's prior hearing: adjustments to the front entry, window arrangement changes, and additional street-level elevation views showing how the butterfly roof interacts with the site. The proposal includes a second-story addition and conversion of a garage to a JADU; the total proposed area is 2,660 sq ft on a 7,342 sq ft lot (about 88 percent of FAR). Transportation and planning discussions resulted in a proposed bulb-out at the intersection to avoid widening the sidewalk onto private property.
Neighbors Erin Steed and Clark James, who live at 809 Margo Street, spoke at public comment describing concerns about privacy, sunlight and amplified sound. Steed asked the board to require accurate story poles, noise-abatement solutions and verification of setbacks and open-area compliance. James questioned the accuracy of the project renderings and called for more precise visualization from actual eye-level viewpoints.
Board members discussed roof slope, drainage strategies for the butterfly roof (including potential overflow/chaining solutions and final downspout details), window height and the visual relationship to adjacent properties. The board required the applicant to provide roofing and drainage solutions and materials for final submittal, a landscape plan showing how the shed pad will be infilled and a material decision for driveway planters; the board also made findings supporting two minor zoning exceptions (hedge height and garage height) and approved the project. Staff announced that approval began the 10-calendar-day appeal period.
