Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />SEPTEMBER 22, 1993 <br />Howe reported that the purpose of the variance request <br />is to save trees, and placing the house straight on the <br />lot will cause the loss of more trees in the back. <br />There was no one else from the general public present <br />wishing to comment on this matter. <br />Upon motion by LaValle, seconded by Pedersen, the <br />public hearing was olosed. <br />The City Attorney reported that the public hearing <br />notice did not indicate whether the side yard setback <br />variance being requested was for the north or south <br />property line, therefore the notice was sufficient for <br />due process requirements and the Council could act on <br />the variance in either location. <br />Morelan felt that while it may be legally acceptable, <br />he did not feel it was morally the right thing to do. <br />Scalze stated that in her conversations with the <br />property owner to the south, it was her feeling that <br />the two property owners had not discussed the issue <br />thoroughly. <br />Howe pointed out that City staff did send the property <br />owner a letter informing her that the variance request <br />had change to the south, and the property owner <br />indicated that she did receive the letter. <br />Capsner felt that if the matter was an issue to the <br />property owner to the south, the property owner should <br />have acted on that concern. <br />Scalze felt the decision was a tough one given Howe's <br />comments that if the variance is not approved, he will <br />place the house straight on the lot and more trees will <br />be lost. <br />Morelan pointed out that the City did not create the <br />timing problem and it was not appropriate to force the <br />issue at this time. <br />Howe also reported that the buyer of the house to be <br />built would prefer the house angled so that it blends <br />with the cul-de-sac more. <br />Mr. LaValle introduced the following resolution and <br />moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION N0. 93-9-296 - APPROVING A FIVE FOOT SIDE <br />YARD SETBACK VARIANCE ON THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE OF <br />2451 SUNRISE DRIVE AS REQUESTED BY GORDIE HOWE OF <br />MASTERPIECE HOMES, WITH THE VARIANCE BEING GRANTED IN <br />ORDER TO SAVE TREES AND UNDERGROWTH ON THE PROPERTY <br />Page 11 <br />