Laserfiche WebLink
NIHDTBS OF THE PLANNIliG COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 <br />#1188 SHELDON KAPLAN <br />2695 KELLY AVENUE <br />Mrs. Kaplan stated that she and her husband bought the two <br />lots and there was no ordinance in effect. They had always <br />considered the second lot buildable and found out only by <br />accident the second lot was declared non-buiIdable without <br />variances. Mrs. Kaplan explained that chey had never used <br />the second lot but only kept it mowed so the neighbors would <br />not complain. If the second lot is sold to the City^ this <br />would create even more traffic. The hardcover on Lot 2 <br />(existing residence) exceeds the limits but only because it <br />is there to enhance the lot by putting gravel along the house <br />instead of letting the eaves shade the sod. Mrs. Kaplan said <br />that they are just asking for the rights that they had when <br />the property was purchase .. <br />Lucy Uphoff» 2699 Kelly wenue, voiced the same concerns that <br />Mr. Berg had previous!' stated. Arlene Garrity, 2701 Kelly <br />Avenue, also felt the s ime. <br />CounciImember Callahan "ixplained that the original developer <br />of Carman Cove had not oeen denied a variance for a similar <br />application but rather there was a question as to how many <br />lots the plat could be subdivided into. <br />Rich and Debbie Rice, 2700 Kelly Avenue, explained that the <br />neighborhood is congested enough and if this is allowed would <br />only add to the drainage problems that exist currently. They <br />would like to preserve the atmosphere of the neighborhood. <br />Hanson stated that he in no way could approve the variances <br />for the separate buildable lot. Perhaps the City should look <br />to purchasing the second lot. <br />Johnson noted that he could not approve variances for the <br />lots because of all the constraints on the lots. Also, if <br />the variances were approved, the second lot would probably <br />require more variances just to build the house. <br />Cohen stated that he felt that it is not fair that the <br />applicants bought the lots always assuming that the second <br />was buildable, however, when the County re-evaluated the <br />second lot, perhaps they should have realized that the lot <br />was no longer considered buildable per the current <br />ordinances. The building envelope is too restricted to place <br />a residence on the lot, and perhaps the City should look to <br />purchasing the property. <br />Brown felt that the safety, drainage, and access to and from <br />Kelly Avenue were all issues of great concern and adding <br />additional residences in this area would only add to the <br />existing problems.