04-27-1988 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES Planning Commission April 14, 1988 Trails (Cont.) The Commission reviewed proposed Ordinance No. 296. The Planner again assured the Commission that the City is not gaining additional rights through this ordinance, but simply including trails as a permitted use in Zoning Districts. Perlinger recommended approval of proposed Ordinance No. 296 - AMENDING SECTION 905, 910, 918 AND 920 OF THE LITTLE CANADA CITY CODE, KNOWN AS THE LITTLE CANADA ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING PEDESTRIAN TRAILS IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS OF THE CITY. Motion seconded by Mrs. Schweizer. Motion carried 6 - 0. Text The City Planner presented proposed Ordinance No. 297 regarding side Amendment yard setbacks, which would allow property owners with large lots Side Yard to divide their property and be allowed to have a 5 foot sideyard Setbacks setback for their existing home. The Planner reported that the matter has come up in the past where a property owner with a large lot placed his existing house anticipating the ability to divide the property some time in the future. However, Codes have been changed, and it is no longer possible to meet sideyard setback requirements. This Code would reduce the required side yard setback to 5 feet, as previously allowed, from 10 feet. The City Planner stated that he is not in favor of the proposed text amendments as he anticipates it will cause the City problems in the future. The Planner pointed out the Foyt property matter as an example, and felt that Mr. Foyt could use this ordinance as justification to request a 5 foot setback on his side yard. The Planner pointed out that the adjacent property owners to Mr. Foyt purchased their property with the assumption that there would be 10 foot side yard setbacks required. Davison agreed and suggested that some relief could be found for the Neamy situation in another way. The Planner felt that by continually grandfathering in situations, the City would be causing itself problems. The Planner explained the Neamy situation and the fact that the Council has approved a lot split for Neamy on the condition that the garage is reduced in size by 5 feet so that setback requirements are met. Under the proposed text amendment, the Neamy garage would not have to be altered, and Neamy would be allowed a 5 foot setback from the side yard lot line. Setbacks on the new lot would have to meet 10 foot requirements. Davison suggested that the potential problems that would be caused by this ordinance outweight the benefits. Schweizer agreed. Page 11