11/14/2001 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2001 Page 3 Staff indicated construction of the proposed garage in the area desired by Mr. Poser would require a separate, second driveway with access via 62nd street. Staff stated City Code did not preclude construction of such a second driveway. There were, however, easement issues. Staff stated there was an eighty -five foot United Power Association easement along the southern side of 62nd Street. The proposed garage did not impact this easement, but the driveway would cross the easement. Similarly, construction of the proposed garage does not appear to impact the current road right -of -way, however the driveway would be affected by any future improvements to 62nd Street. Staff explained Mr. Poser stated that he wanted to locate the garage on the northern part of the property with access via 62nd street for two reasons: 1) the septic system was located on the southern part of the property and precludes there, and 2) there was less traffic on 62nd Street. Staff reviewed the five findings for variance, as stated in the zoning ordinance, that the City shall make in considering all requests for variance in taking subsequent action. Staff recommended denying the variance for the reasons outlined in the staff's report. Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. Steve Poser, 6180 Ware Road, stated he was .05 acres short from being allowed to do what he wanted to do, which was the equivalent of 5 feet. Second, he was not sure why there was a violation on the present shed he had on his property. He stated he had obtained a permit and was not informed at that time he would be in violation. Chair Schaps asked if he had given any thought to eliminating one of the structures. Mr. Poser replied he could do that, but at the time he did not know when he applied that he was in violation. Chair Schaps indicated the Ordinances were there for a purpose, even if he was only .05 acres short. Mr. Corson agreed and stated they did need to draw the line somewhere, and he could not support this variance. Mr. Zych stated Mr. Poser was only .05 acres short from being able to put as many buildings as he wanted to on the property. He stated the neighbors had indicated it was okay with them, so he did not see why they did not grant the request. Mr. Corson replied that the line needed to be drawn somewhere and the rules were there for a purpose. He expressed concern about setting precedence if this was granted. Mr. Corson stated Mr. Poser did not have a unique hardship and therefore, did not qualify for this variance. Mr. Smyser stated the issue was that he already had an accessory building. Mr. Poser stated he wanted to put the garage up to store additional trailers in. He stated the shed could not be seen from any of his neighbors' yards. Chair Schaps indicated the Ordinance allowed Mr. Poser to have a structure, but not the number he wanted or the size he wanted.