My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-25-86 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1986
>
06-25-86 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 2:26:17 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:51:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mz~aures <br />City Council <br />June 25, 1986 <br />7hoe P~r. Fahey pointed out that the Planning Commission voted to deny <br />Variance the variance request as there rras no hardship present. The Planner <br />(Cont.) also recommended denial of the variance. <br />Mr. Thoe asketl a~hat constituted a hards'nip. <br />Fahey pointed out that a hardship cannot be Pinanc9a1, nor due to <br />the placement of the house on the property if there would have been <br />adequate room for a garage if the house had been placetl differently. <br />Mrs. Scalze pointed out that the garage could be constructed behind <br />the house without the necessity of a variance, <br />P4r. Thoe stated that he wanted an attached garage and pointed out <br />that there is a rid~e in his backyard that wotald make placement of <br />the garage difficult. <br />Mrs. Thoe reporteci that there are tW0 other houses in the area that <br />have garages that are not 10 feet from the property line. <br />Fahey stated that at one time the Code allowed garages 5 feet from <br />the property line, but it was changed in 1979. Fahey stated that <br />to his knowiedge, no variances for garage setbacks were oranted in <br />this area. <br />f3ob Kirek, 2541 Star!c Street, stated that the Nuonder garage is not <br />10 feet from the property line, but this was something that the <br />contracter for the house did. <br />Scalze reported that she has discussec# situations like this Lvith <br />the current Building Inspector, and it was his feeling that two <br />wrongs do not mal<e a right. <br />Ms. Plardini introduced the follot~~ing resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NQ. SS-6-259 - CLOSTNG THE <br />PUI3LIC NFARING OM THF CARL TFIOE REQUFST <br />FOR A GARAGE SIDEYARD SETf3ACK VARIF~NCE <br />The foregoing resolution was du1,y seconded by f4r. Faheye <br />A,yes (4) Nardini, Fahey, Scalze, Collova. <br />Nays (0). <br />Etesolut9on declareci adoptecl. <br />7his resolution appears in Reso1ution Book No 15, Page 260. <br />Ms. Nardini introduced the folloeving resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION N0. Sb-6-260 - DENYINf THE C{1RL <br />THOF SIDEYARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR CONSTRUCTIOPI <br />OF A GARAfE THREE FEET FROM THF PROPERTY LINE <br />Page -2- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.