08-21-2000 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(#2601 JOHN AND KAREN BLANK, Continued) Kluth commented he also is in agreement with staying out of the defined setback area. Nygard stated he also would have a hard time approving this application with the sport court located within the defined setback area. Blank inquired whether they would be able to construct the sport court in another location which would require the removal of the larger trees. Lindquist stated the Applicant can construct the sport court but needs to stay out of the defined setback areas. Blank reiterated if the court is constructed in another irca on the property, they would need to remove the larger trees in order to save the smaller, scruffier trees. Lindquist stated the Planning Commission cannot set a precedent by allow ing her to construct the sport court within the defined setback areas for this development. Blank commented it was her understanding other residents within lliis development have applied for variances, which have been granted. Smith stated she recalls variances being granted to allow the residents to construct a driveway but d 3cs not recall an\' variances relating to other items. Gaffron stated he is not aw are of any ' .;,<ianccs being granted outside of \ ariances for a driveway. Nygard moved to recommend denial of Application #2601, John and Karen Blank, 2100 Sugarwood Drive, lor a variance to construct a sport court in the rear of their property. Nygard commented the Applicant has the option of tabling this application tonight or having the Planning Commission vote on the motion. Nygard stated the Applicant has the option of submitting a revised plan. Blank stated it probably would be a better option to withdraw the application. Nygard stated if the Planning Commission votes to deny the variance, this application w ill proceed to the City Council with that recommendation. If the application is tabled, the Applicant has the opportunity to submit a revised plan. Smith stated the .Applicant would need to comply w ith the standards contained in the PRD for the Sugar Woods development. Blank stated they woaJd probably proceed with censtmetion of the sport court in another location which would not require a variance. Smith suggested the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the Cits Council in the PAGE 18