04-22-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 8, 1991 1 )87 (#10)ZONING FILE #1629-MCNULTY CONSTRUCTION CONTINUED Mayor Paterson stated tnat sne n.ia voted against the apolication request to constrjot t.te bui.dinq oecaj^e ohe could not f..nd sufficient hardship to vote in favor. Sne indicated that she could not appro/e the addition. Jabbour indicated that he was ready to ttake a tiotion to deny the application. Jim McNjlty asked far the opportunity to Council, and Mayor Peterson gave him the floor. address the McNulty stated that at the time the l')87 application was being reviewed, he d:.d present what he believed were the hardships involved with the unique property owned by the MacMillan family. He said, ''I believe one of the reasons the tennis court structure was approved is that it better facilitates the use of this 13.5 acre estate. One of the findings, stated as a basis for approving the structure, is that it has allowed for the preservation of the ’ Country-Frencn' ho.ne al.io located on this property. The hardships and findings cited by Council at time they approvtjd the building, are part of the public record. Aa part of the agreement between the Council and the applicant, the applicant agreed to severely restrict his future ability to further develop tne property. Ti,cse restrictions have been recorded and will perpetually remain in the chain of title. That is a very unique arrangement, in my opinion. I believe that thoae restrictions por.e an evon greater hardship this property, than those that e.xisted in 1987 . The building would have required h Variance to be constructed, regardless of whether it was constructed under the ordinances in effect in 1)87, or in 1991, after the City adopted a new ordinance. VJe are asking that Council allow us to do what they granted us permission to do back 1937." Mr. MticMillan stated that h.\s family has pc?rformed the requirements asked for by the City in relation to this structure. He said, "Our family has appreciated the added safety and protection this private facility has offer ad to us. and we have kept it strictly to a family use. I cannot see where adding on to the end of the building will pose any hardship on the land or surrounding area. I do not understand why Council would now change their minds after giving us permission to construct the building." Goetten informed Mr. Mc.cMillan that she is the only Councilmember of the current Council that voted in favor of the application to construct the building. She said, "There are two new Councilmembers, and tv/o members voted again.st the 1987 application. In addition, the City now has a new Ordinance, which was designed specifically to address accessory structures such as this.” - 11 - * - -