Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />SEPTE[4BER 13~ 1995 <br />placement of the Leibel garage in the location proposed <br />would devalue his property since prospective buyers <br />would not want to look at the side of a qarage. Novak <br />stated that the City cannot guarantee that his property <br />would not be devalued by the garage. Novak pointed out <br />that Leibel has other places on his lot where he could <br />place the garage. Novak agreed that moving the <br />location of the garage may cost Leibel more, but felt <br />the garage should not cost him anything. <br />Fahey felt the problem existed because Novak's have a <br />small backyard, and did not feel it fair to penalize <br />the Leibel's because of this. <br />Scalze pointed out that Conditional Use Permits are <br />supposed to be issued in accordance with certain <br />procedures set forth in the ordinance. Scalze felt it <br />did not matter what Novak's backyard size was, pointing <br />out that he met setback requirements for a backyard. <br />Scalze also stated that there was no doubt in her mind <br />that the front yard of the Leibel property was the <br />property between Twin Lake Blvd. and the Leibel house. <br />Fahey agreed. <br />Scalze pointed out that Section 903.020 D. 2. stated <br />that no accessory building, except for farm buildings, <br />can be in the required front yard other than the rear <br />yard. Scalze pointed out that she cannot construct a <br />garage in her front yard. Scalze did not believe the <br />Leibel property should be the only one in town where a <br />10 foot setback is required around all lot lines. <br />Fahey pointed out the unique shape of the lot. Fahey <br />suggested that for a perfectly rectangular lot, the <br />City would allow a garage 30 feet from the front lot <br />line given that 30 feet is the required front yard. <br />Fahey pointed out that he is talkinq about required <br />front yard, not front yard. Fahey suggested that the <br />ordinance is worded to address the normal situation <br />where homes face the street, and pointed out that the <br />Leibel home does face the street. <br />Morelan reported that he discussed the matter with the <br />City Planner who indicated that the Code does not <br />define what this particular lot line of the Leibel's <br />would be. There is no question that the required front <br />property line is at Twin Lake Blvd. and that the rear <br />property line is behind the house. Therefore, by <br />default the other property lines become side lot lines. <br />Morelan agreed that the Code was written for a typical <br />5 <br />