05-09-2022 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Zehnder replied on the survey it shows the contour lines and they continue through on a pretty consistent basis for the neighbors. James Mattson, 940 North Arm Drive, was talking to his neighbor Matt Gettman who mentioned the neighbor north of Mr. Gettman did the exact same thing with the variance process to level off their pool given the slope of the land. Kirchner noted Mr. Ressler’s comment that it must be about practical difficulties and he has yet to hear about what those practical difficulties are. Mr. Zehnder stated the grade is not where it should be if it was backfilled correctly. The dramatic slope of the lot is a practical difficulty, also. Kirchner shared the practical difficulty could be solved using Staff’s solution of using stairs. Mr. Zehnder thinks every variance is a convenience and that Mr. Mattson would prefer to walk out right onto his patio level without going down steps. Kraemer clarified if they take the 956 elevation they are allowed to go 42 inch above that? Oakden replied Staff would support a variance request if it was in the 42 inch range of that 956 elevation. Libby asked Staff if the Applicant would still need a variance for the 956? Oakden replied that is correct and today if they wanted a building permit at a strict reading of the Code, they have 42 inches above existing grade. Libby asked if in the original recommendation for denial Staff had taken into consideration the severity of the slope towards the lake and drainage from roof, gutters, and pool. Oakden replied this specific plan was sent to the City Engineer to review for drainage and waterways. The engineer said that this pattern as proposed would manage drainage for the house and improvements just fine. Chair McCutcheon opened the public hearing at 6:26 p.m. Chair McCutcheon closed the public hearing at 6:26 p.m. Kirchner thinks Staff has gone out of their way to present something that is reasonable. He does not see practical difficulty and would support denial at this time. McCutcheon thinks it is all about the definition of the previous grade and he can see where there is some contention. He tends to believe Staff’s expertise and it looks like they were pretty accurate with their measurement. Erickson has some experience in demolishing houses and one thing the City has made clear is that any rights one may have had due to the structure being there will disappear when the structure disappears. For example a non-conforming setback, lot size, etc. He noted when there was a house there, and it was a certain height, those things are not issues that apply to this. Erickson thinks Staff have done a good job looking at the issues and supports denial.