My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-28-1987 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1987
>
10-28-1987 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2013 1:15:58 PM
Creation date
5/8/2013 1:12:16 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
107
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />Planning Commission <br />October 8, 1987 <br />Mr. Foyt appeared before the Commission and reported that he is <br />requesting the variance so that he can construct the house which <br />he originally planned for the property. Foyt reported that he <br />has spent $10,000 in architect's fees designing this house, and <br />without the variance, he will have to redesign another house. <br />Timmons stated that she agreed the variance should be granted, and <br />felt that there was a hardship present caused by the adjacent <br />property owner. Timmons pointed out that the situation is one over <br />which Mr. Foyt has no control. <br />The Planner pointed out that at some point a subdivision will have <br />to occur to get the adjacent house on property of its own. <br />Davison asked if there was a problem between the property owners <br />with subdividing the property. <br />Foyt replied that he would like the variance issue resolved before <br />action is taken on the subdivision. <br />The Planner reported that the Building Inspector is comfortable with <br />there being a 6 foot separation between buildings in order that <br />building codes are met. The Planner noted that his only problem is <br />that the property owner to the north is relying on a certain amount <br />of setback between the houses, and the Planner did not feel it fair <br />to bring another property owner into the matter. <br />Foyt reported that the property owners to the north are not opposed <br />to the variance. <br />Timmons stated that she disagreed with the Planner's report and <br />felt there was a hardship present. <br />Davison asked if the property was large enough for the house Foyt <br />plans to build if the mistake in location the house to the south <br />had not been made. <br />It appeared the house would have met setback requirements. <br />Timmons asked if the subdivision should be acted upon before the <br />variance. <br />The Planner recommended that the variance be acted upon first. <br />The Planner also noted that Mr. Foyt could redesign a smaller house, <br />however, Foyt has spent money on architect's fees designing this <br />house prior to discovery of the problem. <br />Timmons asked if Foyt's house could be moved back further on the <br />lot so the two homes will not be so close together. <br />Page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.