10-28-87 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mtr~urEs City Council October~ 28, 1987 Ander•son Mr•s. Scalze intr•oduced the following r~esolution and moved its adoption: Gar~age Var~iance RESOLUTION N0. 87-10-516 - DENYING THE ANDERSON (Cont.) GARAGE VARIANCE REQUEST AS THERE IS NO HARDSHIP DEMONSTRATED AS OUTLINED IN CITY ORDINANCE AND DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE PROPOSED GARAGE bJOULD BE LOCATED ON A SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT AND ALSO DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE IS ANOTFIER OPTION AVAIL- ABLE TO THE APPLICANT FOR ADDITIONAL GARAGE SPACE The for•egoing r~esolution was duly seconded by Mr~. Blesener•. Ayes (4) Scalze, Blesener~, Collova, Fahey. Nays (1) LaValle. Resolution declar~ed adopted. This r•esolution appear•s in Resolution Book No. 18, Page 545. Foyt Side Fahey opened the public hear~ing on the r~equest of Ron Foyt for a Yard sideyard setback variance for his property, Lot 5, Block 1, Gervais Setback Shor•es 2nd Addition. Fahey pointed out that the Planning Commission Var~iance voted 4 to 1 in favor• of the var•iance as the house which was built on Lot 4 is encr•oaching par•tly onto Lot 5. The Planner has r•ecommended Agenda denial of the var•iance as no har~dship exists. Item No. 9 Mr. Hessin, attorney representinq Mr. Foyt, appeared before the Council, and r~epor~ted that the var~iance being r~equested has the least impact on the adjacent lots while allowing P1r~. Foyt the ability to constr~uct the home on his pr•oper•ty which he has been planning. Hessin r•epor•ted that they investigated the possibility of asking the pr•oper•ty owners to the nor~th to adjust lot lines, however•, the owner• of Lot 6 has now begun constr•uction of a new home on his lot. Hessin r•epor•ted that Mr•. Foyt is r•equesting that he be able to build up to the 6 foot easement on his north pr•oper•ty line. Hessin r•epor•ted that the house Mr~. Foyt plans to build is 70 feet wide and Mr•. Foyt has spent a gr•eat deal of money in ar•chitect's fees getting his plans dr•awn. Foyt has also owned the pr~operty since 1980. Hessin agr•eed that part of the pr•oblem is between Mr. Foyt and the pr•oper~ty owner• to the south. However•, Mr•. Foyt bought his par•ticular• lot with the intentions of building a cer•tain type of home. The home Mr~. Foyt was planning would have met the City's setback requir•ements had the encr•oachment not occur~r~ed. Mr•s. Scalze stated that she would like to see how the pr•oper•ty will be subdivided to give the owner~ of Lot 4 additional pr•operty to resolve the encroachment problem before she acts on the variance r•equest. Hessin indicated that Mr~. Foyt is planning on giving the owner~ of Lot 4 an easement for• the pr~oper•ty he i s encr~oachi ng on. Page -12-