Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JUNE 24, 1998 <br />Doug McMillan replied that it would be 43 feet in width with a 2 -foot <br />porch extension. However, the porch extension is not considered as part <br />of the setback. <br />Fahey stated that the Council must be satisfied that Residential Business <br />zoning is an appropriate use for the area. Fahey did not feel there was <br />basis for allowing the variance, and did not feel that the fact that the <br />setback would be zero under B -3 zoning was a good reason for granting <br />the variance. Fahey pointed out that the lot is 74 feet wide, and taking out <br />required setbacks, there is only 34 feet of buildable area. <br />Morelan suggested that the best solution would be to combine this lot with <br />the one to the east. <br />Doug McMillan pointed out that the Lots to the east are used as residential <br />homes and the properties along Rosewood Drive are also residential. It <br />was his thought that the RB zoning and use they are proposing for 89 West <br />County Road C would provide a nice transitional zoning that the <br />neighbors to the north and the east would appreciate. McMillan pointed <br />out that under the B -3 zoning, a commercial use could be developed on the <br />site and that the setback on the east property line could be zero. <br />Fahey stated that he would support the proposal if the setbacks could be <br />met. Fahey indicated that he had a problem with rezoning the property to <br />RB if the result is that a variance will be necessary in order to meet <br />setback requirements. <br />Doug McMillan pointed out that the building will be a credit to the area. <br />McMillan acknowledged that a hardship must exist to warrant the granting <br />of a variance, and pointed out that the lot is a lot of record and is very <br />narrow. It will be extremely difficult to develop this property without a <br />variance. <br />Fahey indicated that the City should not create a situation that requires the <br />need for a variance, and rezoning the property to RB will put the <br />requirement for larger setbacks in place. Fahey did not believe the City <br />should create a hardship by rezoning the property. <br />Jan McMillan stated that she felt the coffeehouse would be a nice business <br />to have in Little Canada. It would be an asset to the community and <br />would provide a transition for the neighborhood rather than having <br />something like a liquor store or other commercial business adjacent to the <br />residential homes. <br />Page 9 <br />