02-21-1989 Planning Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

NimiTBS OF THB PIAMMIllG O SSIOM TIHG FEBRUARY 21, 1989 SQBIHG FILE «1277-R1CHARD AMDERSmi COETIEDED recommend approval of such an intensification of use for this limited parcel. Mr. Anderson said that he would be willing to remove an existing shed in the 75-250* setback area and relocate it elsewhere. Planning Commissioner Cohen suggested putting the workshop into the addition and leaving the garage as is. Mr. Anderson said that he would be agreeable to that. Kelley asked that the shed be moved over the 250* line. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It moved by Planning Commissioner Cohen, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to recommend approval of the variances reguested in application #1377, subject to the existing shed located within the 75-250* zone being moved behind that line, allowing an increase in hardcover in that area to 28%; and to allow the 0.9* west side setback variance and 0.4* east side setback variance. Motion, Ayes«6, Nays*0, Motion passed. #1378 CURTIS OSTROM 4€05 NATBRTOmi ROAD VARIABCB PUBLIC BEARIE6 8:20 P.M. - 8x35 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was present for this matter, as was the property owner, Mr. Kamil Ugurbil. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the applicant was seeking a side setback variance for an addition to the southwest corner of the existing residence. The present location of the house does not meet the 50* side yard setback. The applicant claims that the floor plan of the existing residence is such that the southwest corner would be appropriate for the addition. Chairman Kelley expressed his concern about the addition in proximity to the house to the west. He stated that the house was currently 47*8** from the side lot line, the proposed addition would reduce that to 35*7** where 50* was required. Planning Commissioner Brown questioned Mabusth*s expressed concerns pertaining to the floor plan of the house. Planning Commissioner Brown believed that the floor plan was not an adequate hardship and that there were other alternatives. Mr. Ostrom stated that other options were explored and found the current proposal to be most practical. Planning Commissioner Bellows stated that due to the floor plan being used as a hardship, that the existing floor plan should have been included in the information she received; it was her inclination to table this matter.