Laserfiche WebLink
P11 UTE3 <br />City Council <br />Nov. 26, 1986 <br />Neamy Collova stated that he did not like the idea of cutting off a <br />Property portion of the existing garage and a double garage being <br />Division constructed in the back. <br />(Cont.) <br />Recess <br />Mrs. Scalze read the definition of hardship contained in the <br />ordinance. <br />Fahey agreed that if the variance request sited by the Planner <br />was denied, the Neamy request should be denied as well. <br />Mrs. Neamy pointed out that she is not requesting a variance and <br />will cut off 4.5 feet from her garage. Neamy asked if she would <br />be allowed to construct a garage on the hack of her property. <br />The Planner stated that a conditional use permit is required for <br />a second garage. <br />Collova stated that he was concerned that a business might be <br />operated from the second garage. <br />Fahey did not feel the conditional use permit for a second garage <br />would he denied, unless the neighbors objected to it. <br />Council discussed with Mr. Moore and Mrs. Neamy thewidths of the <br />three proposed lots. <br />Council decided to recess at 9:34 P.M. to give Mrs. Neamy and Mr. <br />Moore an opportunity to discuss the lot widths. The meeting was <br />reconvened at 9:40 P.M. <br />Moore asked if the existing garage were turned into a family -room <br />if no conditional use permit were needed for a second garage. <br />The Planner stated that this was correct, and only a building <br />permit would be required. <br />Council discussed at what point a huilding permit could be issued <br />for Lot A, and it was decided that the huilding permit for Lot A <br />could he issued at the time the 4.5 feet of the existing garage <br />were removed, but the building permit for Lot 3 could he issued <br />right away. <br />Ms. Nardini also pointed out that a new survey of the property will <br />be necessary as well as drainage easements on lot lines if required <br />by the City Engineer. <br />Mr. Blesener and Mr. Collova indicated that they felt a variance <br />for the side yard setback was the proper way to handle this <br />request rather than requiring that part of the existing garage be <br />removed. <br />Page 35 <br />