Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Wall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies 6-foot masonry wall variance at 231 Linton Court but grants reduced front-yard landscape relief
Summary
The Historic Preservation Board denied a retroactive variance for a roughly 71-inch masonry front wall at 231 Linton Court, finding the height would injure public welfare, but granted a variance to reduce required living-plant open space after the applicant agreed to remove wood pool decking and remove gravel.
The Historic Preservation Board on March 24 denied a retroactive height variance for a roughly 71‑inch masonry site wall at 231 Linton Court but granted a separate variance reducing the front-yard living‑plant open‑space requirement on the same property.
Design Architects (Dr. Russell Rossiki) told the board the site is an unusual T‑shaped parcel with a shallow front yard and a longstanding masonry perimeter wall; the applicant asked retroactive approval for the wall and relief from the city's 75% living‑plant open‑space rule. Staff's research found masonry site walls historically existed on the property and that some portions appear to have been infilled or altered by a prior owner.
Staff recommended administrative conditions for the wall (remove LED light bars, inward‑swinging gates, building permit to legalize modifications) and recommended removing the pool's front decking and replacing gravel with living plant material to meet more of the living‑plant requirement. The applicant said they were willing to remove or reduce the wood decking and submit a landscape plan.
Board members split on the wall: several said a six‑foot contiguous masonry wall along a narrow pedestrian right‑of‑way is poor urban form and that approving the variance could set a bad precedent. A motion to deny the height variance passed on findings that the variance would bestow special privileges and injure the public welfare. The board then voted to grant the reduced open‑space variance subject to conditions, including removing the wood pool decking in the front‑yard setback and replacing gravel with living plant material; staff will review the final landscape permit and hardscape details.
The board also recorded that if the unpermitted wall cannot be permitted as built by the building division, the owner must lower or reconstruct it to the 48‑inch maximum; if demolished the wall may only be rebuilt in accordance with the numeric height limitation.
Next steps: applicant to file for building and landscape permits to implement required changes; staff will verify compliance with the board's conditions.
