HomeMy WebLinkAboutDI 89-03; Gary Nessim; Discussion Item (DI) (4)A"
APRIL 17, 1989
TO : MARTY ORENYAK
h
FROM : LANCE SCHULTE VIA MIKE HOWES
SUBJECT: GARY NESSIM'S BUILDING HEIGHT ISSUE AT 2986 HIGHLAND DRIVE
Gary Nessim and his representative, Ken Chriss, has requested through me a determination as to whether Gary's proposed remodel of a single family dwelling would comply with the City's building height ordinance. The Planning Director has determined that the proposed structure would violate the City's building height regulations. I drafted a letter to Mr. Ken Chriss explaining that the Director's Determination could be appealed. That was the last communication that I had concerning this project.
The following briefly itemizes the communication that had occurred:
1. In early December, 1988 Gary Nessim submitted a preliminary plan for review by the planning staff. These plans were reviewed on 12/12/88, and comments were returned to Gary that day. At that time the building height issue was identified. Due to the preliminary nature of this submittal, along with trying to provide the benefit of doubt to Mr. Nessim, staff identified that a complete top0 and grading plan would be needed to exactly determine compliance and/or noncompliance with the City's building height requirements.
2. Mr. Nessim provided that information and I took it to the next available staff meeting. On January 6, 1989 staff reviewed Mr. Nessim's resubmittal and determined that the structure violated the City's height ordinance. On that same day I gave a letter to Mr. Nessim and discussed with him personally why his proposal violates the City's height ordinance.
3. On March 30, Ken Chriss, representing Gary Nessim submitted a letter and diagrams for staff to review concerning the proposed remodel. I took this information to our staff meeting of March 31, 1989. With that information, the Planning Director and staff determined that the proposed remodel would exceed the building height ordinance. A letter of March 31, 1989 to Ken Chriss documented this determination. That letter also indicated that the determination could be appealed to the Planning Commission based on the procedures outlined in Section 21.54.140 of the City's Zoning Ordinance.
That was the last contact I have had concerning this proposal.
LBS : af 0renyak.mem