This transcript was exported on Aug 14, 2025 - view latest version here.
Clipped video_31421 Holly Drive (Completed 08/14/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
CDD Designee:
31421 Holly Drive. Does the staff planner have any comments? Daniel Latham:
Sure. Similar to the previous project, there were comments regarding the deck extension. It's a 28-inch elevated deck extension, which totals 67 square feet of additional deck. There was a prior approval to implement the deck and there is one neighbor with concerns about the project, the adjacent neighbor.
CDD Designee:
Okay. I will now open the item for public hearing. Does the project applicant have any comments? Dave Frith:
I do. Good afternoon. It's Steve Frith, project architect here on behalf of my friends Ina and Gordon McBean, who after two years are getting close to wrapping their house construction up, which I think will be welcome news for the neighborhood.
I don't know if you have access to the letter that was submitted by the one neighbor that had expressed some concern. Do you guys have that?
CDD Designee:
Yes.
Dave Frith:
Okay.
CDD Designee:
Staff has received that comment letter and I believe it's been posted to the website as well, yes.
Dave Frith:
Okay, great. So I just basically I printed a picture of that. I can't tell if there is a question over the staking approval. So, why don't I start with that and then finish with the fact that in my personal opinion, 24 inches, two-foot-four inches should be administratively approved. There's no impact on anybody.
The neighbors may disagree, but there were no comments about the size of the deck specifically with the original DRV approval. But why don't I start with basically a copy of the certified staking plan? The confusion and the reason that we're here today, if you look at the picture that they submitted, is there was a two-foot-four inch deck here off of the McBeans' home. This is taken from the neighbors that I think had some concerns.
And the mistake that the general contractor made is our deck approval is 10 feet, and he went ahead and framed it 10 feet from the existing deck that's basically two feet off of the face of the house. So, just from a matter of explanation, we certainly weren't thumbing our nose at the process. This is an honest mistake that was made by a contractor that I think is doing a great job.
He misunderstood that the 10-foot deck extension per my plan, which is my responsibility as the architect, was to be taken from the home but not from the deck that was removed. So, that's point one, Attachment 5
87 This transcript was exported on Aug 14, 2025 - view latest version here.
Clipped video_31421 Holly Drive (Completed 08/14/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
why we're here. Point two, there's a radius retaining wall that clearly shows from the neighbor's view where the stakes are and the stake comes down behind the radius retaining wall.
I went ahead and brought a copy of the certified staking plan. That shows exactly where that stake is, 10 feet off of the face of the house, and the curved retaining wall. And so if you look here, this is just a copy of the certified staking plan. This is a copy of the stake and the curved wall.
And so, from that point, we... This is another drawing that shows the curved retaining wall. The deck was supposed to come here on this row of columns, and you can kind of see in the plan that basically that row of columns is in line with the adjacent neighbor to the south that I think is expressing some concerns. And so, what we did is we went ahead and restaked it another two-foot-four inches out per our proposed plan.
It's actually constructed right now, and I hadn't heard that there were any concerns until we sent out the notification. It's actually been constructed that way for many, many months. But I went ahead and basically was on site today with a tape measure. I know that you can't see this, but if anybody would like this for the record, it shows that the deck is 12 feet deep from the face of the house.
So it's actually four inches less than what we're proposing. And I don't know if there's any benefit for the record to ask for a two-foot deck extension instead of our original two-foot-four proposal. But essentially we're here that asking for administrative review, administrative design review board approval for a deck that was inadvertently built two feet farther than the approved plan.
Last, I don't know if I'm running short on time, but I'm almost done. Last comment is just this is where the column is and then where the deck, you can see basically from the neighbor standpoint, the as-built deck condition that we're asking for approval. And then lastly, just two pictures of the neighborhood.
This is my client's house, the McBeans, this is the house directly to the north.
All of the views here are spectacular, but essentially the primary view is directly towards the ocean. This is the house directly to the north. This is the as-staked, as-built deck that's two feet larger than the approved plan that clearly has no impact here. And a picture of the homeowners to the south that are concerned, this is their deck and their home.
This is the as-built. The deck is actually located to the north of the property, opposite, and that was actually by design so that it would have minimal impact on the neighbors to the south. So, again, hopefully that clarifies the fact that I have documentation that it was staked appropriately. It's been built for many, many months without concern or any concern that I was aware of, and we're actually asking for a two-foot extension to match what's in the field.
Hopefully this isn't a matter that needs to go to design review board. As I said, I don't think there's any noticeable impact or detriment to the neighborhood and hopefully you agree. Thank you.
CDD Designee:
Thank you for providing that project background and history.
Dave Frith:
You're welcome.
CDD Designee:
If there are any members of the public that'd like to address this item, please come to the podium and state your name.
88 This transcript was exported on Aug 14, 2025 - view latest version here.
Clipped video_31421 Holly Drive (Completed 08/14/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Mike Austin:
Hello. Hi, my name is Mike, Mike Austin. I'm the neighbor to the south that the architect is referring to.
The staking plan did follow the original plan. It was staked according to the design review plan, and that's what we were expecting.
So there was an overhang and the staking plan for design review calls for 10 feet at the face of the house, but on the bottom it's very clear in the design review, they take that staking measurement out and then go up and it results in about an eight-foot deck.
And that's just how it was designed that that's in the original design review. That measurement on the staking plan is crystal clear. So, what has happened is that the deck was builtLori Austin:
[inaudible 00:07:46]-
Mike Austin:
Oh, I don't know if he wants to seeLori Austin:
... for the house.
Mike Austin:
... the... It's not a deck, it's just some two-by-four shading.
Lori Austin:
There's noDave Frith:
Make sure to talk upLori Austin:
Yes, I'll wait track [inaudible 00:08:04].
Dave Frith:
And you're in session.
Mike Austin:
So, thereDave Frith:
Mike, this is a larger one. I don't know if you want to share that, but it's the same pictureLori Austin:
Oh, we have that89
This transcript was exported on Aug 14, 2025 - view latest version here.
Clipped video_31421 Holly Drive (Completed 08/14/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Mike Austin:
Yeah.
Lori Austin:
... we can do that.
Mike Austin:
SoDave Frith:
It's just a larger print.
Mike Austin:
... so the original, that shows the original staking plan, so the request is not for two feet, 24 inches. It was already built two feet beyond the staking, and now they're going another two feet beyond that to result in roughly a 12-foot deck. So we do have concerns about the overall process not following the staking plan, not considering the neighbor's privacy impact, or view, or congregation of living space nearby our living space.
Overall, it's just a little frustrating that it was built. I did try to come in a couple of times, but the plans were not available to double-check some things. But now we've got a deck that has been constructed at roughly two feet outside the staking, and now they're asking for another two feet. So, I just think that this should go back to design review.
One thing I would mention about design review is that it's comprehensive. So you kind of look at all the pieces at once and this plan was 700 square feet of addition and a deck, and you kind of look at it all, and you're there at the forum and you make your comments based on what's presented on the staking plan and the overall plan and the design review.
And if it varies, I just think it's impactful because just one component, "Oh, well we'll fix that." It's just we looked at this whole thing as neighbors in the design review process and now it's come down to, "Oh, oops, we made a mistake, and we constructed 10 feet instead of the staking," and, "Oops, we made another mistake and now we're 24 inches plus four, 28 inches beyond that." It does start to get impactful. So, that's all I wanted to say on that. Just overall view, privacy, congregation, building a deck out on over a slope, which is discouraged on the design process. So, that's all I have to say.
CDD Designee:
Thank you for your comment. If anyone else would like to, please state your name for the record? Lori Austin:
Yes, hi, I'm Lori Austin, and aside from the things that he's already discussed, I do want to point out that when you look at... Can I bring this to you?
CDD Designee:
Sure.
90 This transcript was exported on Aug 14, 2025 - view latest version here.
Clipped video_31421 Holly Drive (Completed 08/14/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Lori Austin:
You need toCDD Designee:
Have youLori Austin:
... have the other one.
CDD Designee:
... previously provided these exhibits to the staff planner? Lori Austin:
Yeah, so I can justCDD Designee:
Are they the record?
Lori Austin:
... show it, I can show it to you, but when youCDD Designee:
Sure.
Lori Austin:
... do the initial flag staking, you assume that that is going to be the deck, which is what we made the assumption on. So and then the original design review, we were fine with that. That was a reasonable deck, in that space. And I know that they built it on that side to be more cognizant of our side, because we sit on our deck a lot.
And the other deck on the other side extended much farther out, so they weren't impacted because that extended much farther out. However, when they built it, and I will show you on these photos here, they are much farther out than it was originally proposed and approved at that time. We did not have any comments about that because we felt it was, at the size it was at that time reasonable.
So, I will show you this. He has that larger photo that you can show if you'd like, but besides the flagging one that he had, here's this from our deck. So first I took a picture from the top.
Speaker 6:
Make sure this is a picture of MikeLori Austin:
I'm sorrySpeaker 6:
91 This transcript was exported on Aug 14, 2025 - view latest version here.
Clipped video_31421 Holly Drive (Completed 08/14/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
... [inaudible 00:11:47]-
Lori Austin:
Oh, okay. So I can show you this from here? Okay, so the original, I don't know where it went, but I took a picture from up top, and here's a picture directly from our deck, and you can clearly see the house right here, right?
The stucco house right here. The deck does not extend past that stucco house and it goes over and it goes in. Right? And so I thought, "Okay, well that's good. It wouldn't have affected the neighbors on the other side because what you don't see, but I'll show you, is they have a top deck and a lower deck, but this deck is tucked in, not affecting the neighbor on the other side." And to me it's like, "Okay, it's tucked in enough, it's not going to be protruding past my house. We can kind of be like neighborly this way or what have you, but not have you right there." Also, at that space that it is, it isn't overshadowing by another four feet. And this whole space right here, right below that is my master bedroom and my windows and everything because my deck is not cantilevered.
So, my bedroom downstairs, it encompasses not only the family room or our main living space, but also this deck. So now they can see right into my bedroom. Plus, we have a bedroom that's on a raised foundation. Okay? So, you would think that, "Okay, but it's so far down you won't notice it." However, my floor is raised up. So, when I'm standing in my bedroom in that space, my master bedroom, the height, I feel like the height up top of my head is equal to the deck height. But that's for me looking from afar. I don't actually know that to be the case, but we are on a raised foundation, so, and our windows are such that when I'm standing in my bedroom, the bottom of my window goes to about right here, and then it goes up to about right here.
So, that's our window. And when I'm standing there, they're right there. I can show you as well, if you look at this house as the guideline for where that deck should be, then you go to the footings that they have. Here's the end process of the amount of dirt moving for that deck. And as he described this deck right here, that's not a deck.
There's no physical access to that little structure. There's nothing, you don't sit on that. You don't go on that. There's fixed windows over there, and these are kitchen windows over here. So it wasn't ever a deck. And then this is the footings that they prepared for that new deck. And here is the house right here that ends those flags.
So you can see that just by that, the footings are way past that house and then the deck cantilevers over these footings. Okay? So, this is not just a 28-inch deck extension off of the original design. When you look here, now, from our deck and you saw it beforeCDD Designee:
There is aLori Austin:
... from our deckCDD Designee:
... three-minute time limit, soLori Austin:
92 This transcript was exported on Aug 14, 2025 - view latest version here.
Clipped video_31421 Holly Drive (Completed 08/14/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Okay.
CDD Designee:
... you'll need to wrap up soon.
Lori Austin:
Okay. So I'll do just a couple more. So, here's our deck and I was asked to do a similar photo, and you have them. So I tried to include the same door, the same everything, the same presentation. You can see that stucco gray house where the deck should have ended, and you can see how far it extends past that stucco gray house. So it's not two feet, four inches.
Here is another view where I am trying to be on a par with our railing to the overhang, and the cantilevering of their deck, the new deck, when it should not have been built past this gray area. So, it's much more than described as this two foot, four inches that he's saying.
CDD Designee:
If you can wrap upLori Austin:
Okay.
CDD Designee:
... your comments and summarize.
Lori Austin:
Okay, last thing is, this is from my master bedroom window and the deck, right there.
CDD Designee:
Okay.
Lori Austin:
So, and then this is the staking from the inside family room where you could see that my view, here's the other deck that I mentioned, is not as impacted. Only now, the deck extends past... I had to open the window because the reflection back into the window wouldn't let me.
But here's now where the deck is, it is built. Here's where it should have ended over here, right? So I figure this window would've been the impingement, but then there's this added space because it's, I don't know what that's called. Okay?
So, it's not as described, and we would like to present this at a formal design review hearing because this was not built to what we were given in the beginning as their comprehensive full work plan, and it's way beyond the 28-inch scope that they have described.
CDD Designee:
Okay, thank you for your comments. Would the project applicant like to respond? 93 This transcript was exported on Aug 14, 2025 - view latest version here.
Clipped video_31421 Holly Drive (Completed 08/14/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Dave Frith:
Yes, please. Just real quickly, I'll kind of hit them in the order that Mike and Laurie had shared them. As far as Mike's comment about not following the staking, I simply respectfully disagree. This is a copy of the certified staking.
There's clearly a 10-foot dimension shown on the certified staking plan, and that's further augmented by the fact that there's kind of a curving planter wall and you can see that the stake is basically behind that curving planter wall.
So, I'm not sure where the eight feet is coming from. Our staking plan clearly shows 10 feet. Second, as far as plans not being available, both Mike and Laurie have a relationship with their next-door neighbors as well as the general contractor that I think is actually doing a pretty good job of keeping the neighborhood peace.
The plans should have been available. I'm not sure why they weren't available. I can't speak to that, but would be happy to share them. I would like to comment though that this deck has been staked, has been built for many, many months, and I didn't realize it until I was doing the railing calculations.
They sent me a sign-off on the railing shot drawings and realized that there was 12 feet of railing. And I said, "Roman, this is a 10-foot deck." And he said, "Oh, 10 feet from that deck or non-deck that was two feet."
So, it was, point is it's been constructed that way for a long time. I haven't heard about it, and I'm the one that proactively am coming back to Admin DRB to clean up a mistake that was made on site.
Mike made the comment, another mistake. "Oops, oops, oops. I'm not sure if there have been other mistakes. I'm here to talk about the fact that the deck was built two feet longer than the approved 10- foot plan." It's actually two feet, not two-foot-four, if we want to modify the admin design review application.
Lastly, as far as Laurie, her comment about seeing... Not lastly, sorry, two more. Laurie saying that you can see into my bedroom, that's the design review board's process. These homes are all blessed with a magnificent view, and there were no issues with the adjacency between the side yards. That's an existing condition. Those windows are there, both of these houses are built there.
I'm not here to talk about seeing into her bedroom, I'm here to ask for the administrative approval on a 24-inch deck extension. In my opinion, the security and the privacy and all of those issues were discussed at design review. Two last ones, the dirt moving has nothing to do with this deck. There are landscape permits, there are terraced walls that step down the project that I think Laurie made the comment that all of this excavation or dirt moving had something to do with the deck. That's simply not true.
All of the dirt moving was organized through building inspections and there are no red tags or any improprieties with that. That has nothing to do with the deck. And lastly, the comment about the stucco gray house, I have a picture, I'm not, it's hard to determine, but I have a picture that cites perfectly down where the post is, and in the distance is the front of Mike and Laurie's house.
So I just know that cameras and photographs can be a little bit misleading depending on where you're standing, this, that and the other thing. The original posts are in line with where their gray stucco house is. This cantilevered extension, which is 24 inches more than the approved plan is what we would like to ask for administrative design review board approval.
In my personal opinion, this is small potatoes and hopefully not something that we want to waste design review board's time. I know that's not my decision, but I really don't think that this will be contested and hopefully we don't need to spend a few more months and $4,000 and go through that process. 94 This transcript was exported on Aug 14, 2025 - view latest version here.
Clipped video_31421 Holly Drive (Completed 08/14/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
And we notice, I do know that Mike and Laurie are the only ones that have expressed any concern, and the deck is on the opposite side of their property. And so, I have no further comments unless you have questions.
CDD Designee:
Okay, thank youDave Frith:
Thank you.
CDD Designee:
... for that response. I will now close the public testimony. Based on the comments made and the diagrams presented and reviewing the plans and the administrative record, it appears that we before design review board for the additional 24 or 28 inches of deck that has been constructed but was not on the previous plans.
With respect to decks, the main considerations are of course, view equity and privacy concerns. Because we're only looking at the additional 28 inches, or roughly 67 square feet, it would be my finding that the project can be approved as presented. It is an administrative process to have an elevated deck, and so I am approving the project based on the plans provided in the testimony given.
I understand neighbor's frustration. But the scope before us today is just the portion of the deck that has been constructed but was not shown on the original plans. And with respect to that scope of work, there doesn't appear to be any view equity or privacy concerns. And so the project is approved as presented.
That concludes today's hearing. There is a 14-day right of appeal which will end June 20th. If you have any questions, please reach out to the project planner and that ends today's hearing. Thank you all for attending.
Lori Austin:
Thank you.
Dave Frith:
Thank you very much.
Lori Austin:
Thank you.
95