04/09/2003 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board March 12, 2003 Page 4 • 3. The plans shall be modified to the reduce the impervious surface to 75% or less. • • 4. The modifications and comments as set forth in the City Engineer's memo, dated March 6, 2003, shall be incorporated into the plans. 5. The ordering Kiosk, in the drive- through lane shall be relocated westerly to accommodate additional stacking. 6. The drive- through exit shall be extended to the south to route existing traffic through the jparking lot more uniformly. 7. The sidewalk area shall be modified to provide separation between the parking stalls. 8. The applicant shall enter into a Site Performance Agreement with the City. The motion was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 4 -0. D. Michael McGough, 153 Parkview Drive, Variance Staff explained the applicant was requesting a variance to construct an addition onto his home. The proposed one -story addition would extend 10 feet into the required 30 -foot rear yard setback. Staff reviewed their March 12, 2003 report summarizing the five findings for a variance. Staff stated they were recommending denial of the variance request due to there being no unique circumstances or conditions on the property which were creating a hardship situation. Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. Mike McGough, 153 Parkview Drive, stated he had lived in his home since 1994. He stated he liked the neighborhood and he did not want to do something him or his neighbors did not like and therefore, he did not want to turn the addition sideways. He noted he believed he did have a hardship with the layout of the property. He stated this was the best way he could architecturally add the addition. He stated if he tilted the addition 90 degrees, he would have a big lean to shed out the back of his house. He indicated his neighbors had no objection to the addition as proposed. Chair Schaps asked if there was a patio in existence. Mr. McGough replied there was. He noted he would landscape all of the way around the addition. He noted he had a comer lot and because of that, he had three 30 feet setbacks, which was also, in his opinion, a hardship. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to recommend denial of the variance request due to there being no unique circumstances or conditions on the property which were creating a hardship situation. The motion was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 4 -0.