Laserfiche WebLink
MIHUTBS OP THE PLAMHIHG COMMISSIOH MBBTING HELD JOMB 15, 1987 <br />#1161 WBBSTRAMD COWTIHUED ^ <br />Bellows voiced concern with determining the dry <br />buildable area based on today's exceptionally dry <br />conditions. <br />Chairman Kelley noted the fact that the proposed barn <br />is located in the front yard. He also felt the <br />neighbor, Mr. Kokesh, should be present to voice his <br />objection. He asked applicant why the 100' rear setback <br />for house could not be met. <br />Mr. Weestrand stated the setback was due to a steep hill <br />and noted that he could possibly move the house back <br />another 12' placing it 79' from the lot line. <br />Chairman Kelley found it difficult to approve numerous <br />variances for a future property owner, feeling that his <br />opinion would be different if the applicant already <br />owned the property. <br />Brown felt strongly about preserving the rural 5-acre <br />minimum and found no hardship to grant the variance. <br />Johnson felt the intent of the 5-acre minimum was being <br />met, however, the 100' setback should be met. <br />Bellows stated that the code clearly requires 5.0 acres <br />dry buildable and she is against creating a substandard <br />lot in an area for which there is no need to create <br />substandard lots. <br />Cohen felt there was not enough information regarding <br />the questionability of the property being a 5 acre site, <br />the criteria based on this dry year, the objecting <br />neighbor not being present, and concern with the title <br />fee owner, therefore, suggested tabling the application. <br />He also noted that he felt the 100' setback should be <br />met. <br />Hanson agreed with Cohen. <br />The majority of the Planning Commission stated they did <br />not have a problem with grantin- the variance for number <br />of horses, or the common ownership of the property, and <br />would approve the application if the 100' setback was <br />met. <br />There were no comments from the public regarding this <br />matter and the public hearing was closed. <br />Mr. Weestrand requested that the Planning Commission <br />make a recommendation at this meeting subject to meeting <br />the 100' rear setback requirement. <br />i <br />i <br />•1