Laserfiche WebLink
x~iINUTEB <br />City Council <br />rebruary ~~, lyo~ <br />Cable `PV The £oregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Forsberg. <br />(Cont,) Ayes (3) Fahey~ Forsberg, Soalze. <br />Nayes (O). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. f~, Yage 5~. <br />Christapher Nir, Christopher llrake has requested Council approval of a variance £or <br />Drake a lot to be subdivided not abutting a City street and a variance Y'or a <br />kroposal 1ot wi2h a lesser width than 75 feet. Mrs. Scalze opened the public <br />hearing on the above variances. <br />Mrs. Scalze pointed out that the Planning Commission has recommended <br />the disapproval o.Y i~ir. Drake~s request, <br />Mr. Nielson~ the City Planner~ commented that the current situation <br />with tne Drake property is non-conforrning under the City~s ordinances <br />in that there are three structures on one lot. Mr. Dr.ake would like <br />to split the property into three lots. <br />Tne Ylanner commented that Mr, Drake is negotiating with some adjoining <br />property owners for the purchase of aaaitional property. The P].anner <br />commented that he recommends the request be aexiied until Mr, prake has <br />acquired the neighboring property. <br />Mr. Fahey stated that the Drake situation is not unlike a s~rnilar <br />request made by Mrs. Yelton which the Council denied. N1r. F'ahey <br />commented that he could not support the Drake request as the Council <br />has denied similar requests in the past. <br />Mr. Drake commented that there is a matter oY tirning in that he has <br />a buyer for one of the proposed .~ots who would like to begin building <br />on that 1ot. <br />Mrs. Scalze commented that there is another item on tonight~s agenda <br />which was denied in the past anp the people have reworked their lot <br />configurations so that tney would have adequate i'rontage, Mrs. Sca~ze <br />stated that just because mr. Uraxe~s property is currently non-con£orming <br />does not mean it should continue to be non-conforming. <br />Nir. F'ahey stated tnat the situation is not unsolvab:Le and is just a <br />matter of reconfiguration. <br />Mr, r'orsberg stated that ne agreed that qecause the property is <br />non-conforming does not mean that the Council should approve another <br />change tnat wo~u.d be non-conforming. <br />Mr. Drake statea taiat his proposal would make tne property moxe <br />conforming than it is now, <br />1~lx~s, 5caize sca~ea tinat because the lots in tne area are iairty large, <br />she would liice to see tne property divided into three :I.ots ratner than <br />£our. <br />Yage -3- <br />