Laserfiche WebLink
iUMtinK OP THE PLMniHG COMMISSIOH MBBTIHG ■Q¥BMBBR li» 1987 <br />• I .<41•1107 LBHIS/ntXTTBL COHTIV <br />It was Boved by Bellows, seconded by Taylor, to <br />recoirmend approval of the renewal variance per staff <br />recommendation subject to the following condition: <br />1. At the time of building permit review, sufficient <br />information shall be submitted to the City for staff <br />to make the determination that the drainage pattern <br />will not be "adversely affected" by improvements to <br />the property i.e. Condition #6 must be satisfied. <br />Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />#1207 GSn AHD CATHSRIHB SCAHLOH <br />2815 CASCO POIHT ROAD <br />VARIARCBS <br />CORTIHUATIOR OP POBLIC HBARIHG <br />Mabusth stated that applicant has requested that their <br />application be tabled until further notice. <br />> II rs <br />#1209 TINA ffHITB <br />2150 PROSPECT AVI <br />VARIARCB <br />CORTIROATIOH OP PUBLIC HBARIHG 8:04-8:06 <br />Tina White was present for this matter. <br />Gaffron noted that applicant has provided a design plan <br />showing elevations of the proposed solarium, and has <br />submitted a diagram of the room layout of the existing <br />house per Planning Commission direction. Applicant <br />requests a side setback variance to replace an <br />existing porch with a solarium. <br />Tina White noted that all other locations for the <br />solarium would require a variance, except the north side <br />which is not a desireable location for a sunroom; and <br />the main purpose for the solarium is to replace the <br />deteriorating porch. <br />Johnson agreed that the proposed location is the only <br />feasible location for the solarium, therefore, he is in <br />favor of the request. <br />Brown questioned the hardship feeling the porch could be <br />replaced in the same footprint that exists. <br />Tina White stated that the dimensions of the factory <br />built solarium to match the pitch of the house are <br />larger than the existing porch. <br />There were no comments from the public regarding this <br />matter and the public hearing was closed. <br />It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Hanson, to recommend <br />approval of the sideyard setback variance as proposed <br />per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />1