CCAgendal_94Apr27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 3 Council Minutes April 13, 1994 Mr. Glen Olson, 1780 Asbury St., a neighbor to the rear of 1775 Asbury, indicated to the council that he feels it would be detrimental to the value of his property and also would encroach on his rearyard privacy. Mr. Olson's son, Mr. Ken Olson, was also present and commented that he thought the code was set up with certain setbacks for a reason and the city should adhere to the code's 30 foot rearyard setback. Mayor Baldwin reminded council that they should not look at the personalities involved, they should look at the property. He also suggested the 30 foot rearyard setback in the code may not be appropriate for that particular area of the city and Y p Y there were other homes in that area that have additions to the rear. Councilmember Gibson Talbot remarked that council should look at the code rather than individual requests. After further discussion, Councilmember Jacobs moved to deny the variance and support the recommendation of the planning commission that recommended denial of the variance as stated in the planning commission report because it did not meet the hardship standards for granting a variance including the following reasons: 1. The property owner did not demonstrate a hardship in order to have a variance granted. 2. Any past variances granted by the city, and any building or site improvements that do not conform to the city's zoning code, do not create a hardship for a property owner requesting a variance, and therefore, are not a reason for granting a variance. Although there are some existing structures which encroach into the rear yard further than the 30 foot rear yard setback along this block with the shallow Tots, the city records do not show that any variances were granted for this purpose. No additions appear to be two stories in height. Two building permits for rear yard additions were found in the files. 3. A property owner's preference for how the interior space is arranged in a home or how the exterior of a home is designed are not identified as a hardship standard for granting a variance. If a variance was the only way to preserve the architectural or historical significance of a structure, this might meet the standards for granting a variance. The proposed addition of a two story attached garage to this two story home will change the exterior appearance and symmetry of the structure.