02-27-2002 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 27, 2002 Anderson pointed out that iFthe house were shifted there to Che north and the east there would be no need for a variance or a vacation. Fahey suggested that the City Engineer evaluate the Braun Intertec report and inform the Council whether or not the lot is buildable without a variance. Fahey also suggested that if pylings need to be used to build a house that meets setbacks, that the City Engineer provide an estimate for what that cost might be. Roberto felt that the cost of pylings or the additional fill that would be required in order to meet setback requirements would make the project economically unfeasible for him. Scalze pointed out that there are other houses in the City that required the use of pylings. Scalze felt that the it was not proper to grant a variance in order to save a property owner the cost of pylings. Scalze pointed out that there was a request for a variance in the Carla Lane area for a garage that involved pylings as well that was denied a number of years ago by the Council. Fahey felt that if the cost of soil improvements or pylings was so great as to make a property unbuildable, than that should be a factor in considering whether or not a variance should be granted. Fahey stated that he would like an interpretation of the soils report by the City Engineer prior to acting on the variance request. Fahey felt that the request for vacation of a portion of Rose Lane may be reasonable given that this section of Rose Lane is unimproved and likely never will be. Fahey again stated that he would like the City Engineers interpretation of the Braun report and a determination from him as to whether or not pylings are needed to construct the house in a location that meets setbacks. 1=ahoy pointed out that under the Roberto proposal, if 10 feet of Rose Lane is vacated, a 10-toot variance is still required. Scalze pointed out that Roberto is assuming that if 10 feet of Rose Lane is vacated that his property will accrue all of this 10 feet. Scalze noted that the City could approve a vacation that involved 5 feet on the north side of the street and 5 feet on the south. Fahey felt the situation was a unique one given that Rose Lane does not go all the way through. Fahey also noted that the vacation will be a mute point if the City Engineer says that the soils are such that it will not be cost prohibitive to building within the required setbacks. Joe Buche, 298 Rose Lane, stated that he is opposed to the variance and the vacation. E3uche noted that his front window will look out into Robertds back