Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />DECEMBER 10, 1992 <br />addition to the house could be constructed. The <br />Planner pointed out that the house would continue to <br />exist as a non - conforming structure. Therefore, should <br />the house burn down or be destroyed, it could only be <br />rebuilt if it were in full conformance with Ordinance <br />requirements. <br />Greg Ryan, adjacent property owner, reported that Mr. <br />Grabrick contacted him a couple of days ago about <br />purchasing his property. Ryan reported that he is <br />checking into the value of the property at this time. <br />Ryan reported that his intention had been to build on <br />the lot within a couple of years, and will have to <br />decided whether or not to sell the property. Ryan <br />reported that he did not recall that Grabrick had ever <br />contacted him before about the purchase of the <br />property. <br />Ryan reported that he believes the the value of his <br />property has come down because of the shape of the <br />Grabrick home. Ryan felt that the house was out of <br />character with the neighborhood, and felt that an <br />addition to the house would increase the problem. <br />Keis pointed out that an addition to the Grabrick house <br />will increase the value of the house. <br />Grabrick was concerned that should the variance not be <br />approved his house would continue to exist as <br />non - conforming. Grabrick pointed out that his house is <br />constructed on pilings that cost $25,000 to $28,000 in <br />1981. Grabrick was concerned about rebuilding his <br />house to meet setback requirements and having to <br />install new pilings. Grabrick felt this would be an <br />economic hardship. Grabrick did not believe that his <br />house was an oddity in the neighborhood, pointing out <br />that no two houses in the area are the same. <br />Drabick pointed out that should the house burn down or <br />suffer significant damage, Grabrick could always apply <br />for a variance to rebuild at that time. <br />The City Planner stated that the Code says that a <br />non - conforming house would have to be re- established in <br />full conformance of the Ordinance. The Planner felt <br />that the setback encroachment was a civil matter <br />between the two neighbors at this point, and not an <br />issue for the City. The Conditional Use Permit will <br />allow Grabrick to construct his addition as proposed, <br />but would leave the house non - conforming. If a <br />variance were granted it would change the setback from <br />10 feet to 2 feet. The Planner felt that if variance <br />criteria is not met and the variance granted anyway, a <br />Page 3 <br />