Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING COMMISSION <br />September 16, 1998 <br />Page 2 <br />3. Citizens' Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda <br />There were no citizens' requests or comments on items not on the agenda. <br />4. <br />Planning Case No. 533 -98 <br />Property Involved: 5249 Greenfield Avenue <br />Consideration of Resolution No. 556 -98, A Resolution = ='P'variance R <br />Sidewalk. <br />Applicant: Timothy White <br />The applicant, Timothy White, was present. <br />Associate Ericson gave his report as follows <br />The applicant was back before the Planning Commission a ft p.,0: n0 : ime after his original request <br />had been tabled. At the September 2, 1998 Plar j ing Comm sion meeting, significant discussion <br />was held regarding the merits of this f lise as ell as the in rpretation of the language in the Code <br />relating to setbacks. Because of ny factor possibl - rdships), such as the slope of the land <br />north of the rage, safety considerations andlack o c'cess elsewhere on the lot, the Planning <br />Commissi . , . - d to tablet o uaest to enable` ta to draft both approval and denial versions of <br />the resoltrtn . <br />Staff was recot� that the nn Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution <br />556-98, a Resol itio Ap roving a r Fance for Timothy White of 5249 Greenfield Avenue, to <br />allow for a <br />...-,§1W.0--, uced side r `=setback` for a deck -like sidewalk. <br />Chairperson Peterson returned the floor to the Commission for questions of staff. <br />suggested the foliowing amendment to the Resolution: Add to the first WHEREAS the <br />dent riptive notes that , ncson had included in Section (a) under the staff report Analysis. She also <br />scirggAted . addinwverbiage that stated leveling of the sidewalk on the north side of the garage was <br />not ` os `bI au to exposure of the garage footings. <br />Obert stated the hardships that were being discussed were really not hardships but conditions that <br />were brought on by the property owner. He voiced his opposition to the stated hardships and <br />expressed his concern that the City was allowing too many variances for work that had been done <br />without first applying for the proper work permits. <br />