Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />OCTOBER 10, 1996 <br />SPECIAL <br />USE PERMIT <br />FOR HOME <br />OCCUPATION - <br />470 COSTA <br />LANE - <br />THORP <br />which exist creating a hardship situation. <br />Thorp did not feel it was fair if he dragged other <br />property owners who have sheds in violation of the Code <br />into this matter. However, he felt he should be <br />allowed to leave his shed where it is. <br />Knudsen stated that the Commission understands Thorp's <br />position, and at its last meeting tried to create a <br />hardship where one really did not exist under the <br />letter of the Code. The City Council has said there is <br />no hardship, and has offered to relocate the shed for <br />Thorp. <br />Schletty reported that he sympathized with Thorp's <br />position, but agreed there was no hardship. <br />Schletty recommended denial of the Variance request for <br />encroachment of a shed into the required side yard <br />setback for a corner lot as requested by Richard Thorp, <br />470 Costa Lane, based on the fact there is no hardship <br />present, and requesting the City Council assist Mr. <br />Thorp in the cost of relocation or removal of the shed. <br />Motion seconded by Barraclough. <br />Motion carried 7 - 0. <br />Mr. Richard Thorp, 470 Costa Lane, appeared before the <br />Commission requesting approval of a special use permit <br />for a home occupation for his lawn care business. <br />Thorp reported that there are several property owners <br />with home occupations in the area. Thorp felt <br />because of the shed issue, he is being singled out and <br />was informed he had to apply for a permit for his home <br />occupation. Thorp reported that other than store some <br />equipment in his garage, all he does from his home in <br />relation to his business is answer the phone. <br />The City Planner reported that the purpose of the home <br />occupation provisions is to make a business as <br />invisible as possible, so it does not have a negative <br />impact on the neighborhood. The Planner indicated it <br />appeared the Thorp home occupation could meet the <br />requirements of the Code. <br />Thorp expressed concern with the annual review period. <br />9 <br />Page 64 <br />