Laserfiche WebLink
COUNCIL MINUTES July 8, 2019 <br />APPROVED <br />85 Council Member Rafferty moved to accept the donation as recommended. Council Member Maher <br />86 seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote <br />87 <br />88 PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT <br />89 There was no report from the Public Services Department. <br />90 <br />91 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT <br />92 <br />93 6A) Consider Resolution No. 19-75 Denying a Variance for Curb Cut/Driveway Width for <br />94 6626 Enid Trail — City Planner Larsen reviewed information on the request: <br />95 - Applicant for variance from driveway width (current); <br />96 - Building was done by Sharper Homes and the Certificate of Survey shows the proper width <br />97 from curb cut to property line; <br />98 - It came to the City's attention that the width as constructed was not proper; <br />99 - Home was purchased during winter conditions; <br />100 - Noted that the driveway distance is lengthy but that doesn't impact the width requirement; <br />101 - Other newly constructed homes in the vicinity are in compliance; <br />102 - Photos shown of home and driveway; <br />103 - Council and Planning & Zoning has discussed driveway width regulations; <br />104 - Staff recently sponsored a builders workshop to educate builders on regulations and plan <br />105 compliance; noted that this home was built before that workshop; <br />106 - Staff hasn't found any hardship warranting a variance in this case. <br />107 <br />108 Ms. Larsen noted that both the Planning and Zoning Board and staff are recommending denial of the <br />109 variance request. <br />110 <br />111 Mayor Reinert noted that sometime during construction someone made a decision to not follow the <br />112 approved plans. He asked if the street set back (larger than usual) is a consideration and Ms. Larsen <br />113 explained why it is not. <br />114 <br />115 Council Member Manthey noted that the size of non-compliance is much larger than situations where <br />116 the City has considered a variance. <br />117 <br />118 Adam Neeck, property owner, addressed the council. Mr. Neeck and his wife noted the amount of <br />119 activities involved in building a new home and that when the driveway was put in they had no idea it <br />120 wasn't in compliance. He has reviewed the City's ordinance and he doesn't see that the reasons for <br />121 the regulations actually apply in this case. The comparable driveway that was shown by staff isn't <br />122 identical; with their property the driveway isn't straight and was designed to be functional. <br />123 <br />124 Mayor Reinert noted that he'd argue the same points he's hearing if it was his properly. The council, <br />125 however, has to consider the specific definition provided to them because every variance granted <br />126 essentially sets a precedent the council will have to live with in the future. He explained that the <br />127 council asked the Planning and Zoning Commission to look at regulation changes for driveway width <br />128 and they did not recommend any change. He sees that the builder or someone they hired did the <br />3 <br />