04-08-1991 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 8, 1991 ( #10)ZONING FILE #1629- MCNULTY CONSTRUCTION CONTINUED Mayor Peterson stated that she had voted against the 1 -387 application request to construct the building because she could not find sufficient hardship to vote in favor. She indicated that she could not approve the addition. Jabbour indicated that he was ready to make a motion to deny the application. Jim McNulty asked far the opportunity to address the Council, and Mayor Peterson gave him the floor. McNulty stated that at the time the 1987 application was being reviewed, he did present what he believed were the hardships involved. with the unique property owned by the MacMillan family. He said, "I believe one of the reasons the tennis court structure was approved is that it better facilitates the use of this 13.5 acre estate. One of the findings, stated as a basis for approving the structure, is that it has a'-lowed for the preservation of the 'Country- French' home also located on this property. The hardships and findings cited by Council at the time they approved the building, are part of the public record. As part of the agreement between the Council and the applicant, the applicant agrei =_d. }o severely restrict his future ability to further develop the property. Those restrictions have been recorded and will perpetually remain in the chain of title. That is a very unique arrangement, in my opinion. I believe that those restrictions pose an even greater hardsh'i.p on this property, than those that existed in 1987. The building would have required << Variance to be constructed, regardless of.whether it was constructed under the ordinances in effect in 1987, or in 1991, after the City adopted a new ordinance. We are asking that Council allow us to do what they granted us permission to do back in 1987." M.C. ' MacMillan slated that his family has performed -the requirements asked for by the City in relation to this structure. He said, "Our- family has appreciated the added safety and protection this private facility has offered to us, and we have kept it strictly to a family use. I cannot see where adding on to the end of the.building will pose any hardship on the land or surrounding area. I do not understand why Council would now change their minds after giving us permission to construct the building." Goetten informed Mr. MacMillan that she is the only Councilmember of the current Council that voted in favor of the application to construct the building. She said, "There are two new Councilmembers, and two members voted against the 1987 application. In addition, the City now has a new Ordinance, which was designed specifically to address accessory structures such as this." - 11 -