Laserfiche WebLink
• PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 <br /> July 15, 1998 <br /> C. Update on Overton Foyer Expansion at 2824 Woodale Drive <br /> Ericson told the Commission that the Overtons had not presented architectural plans to <br /> the City when they applied for their variance. The applicants had given an oral <br /> presentation through their architect and this presentation was the information that the <br /> Commission used in making their decision to grant the variance. Now that the addition to <br /> the home is taking place, the roof lines that had been described as slightly taller and in <br /> character with the existing home, were not fitting in with the character of the existing <br /> house or the neighborhood. <br /> Obert expressed concern that the City's development requirements for this type of project <br /> didn't stipulate that an addition must fit in with the existing neighborhood or blend in with <br /> the existing house. <br /> Ericson quoted from Section 1125 of the City Code, Variances: "The variance would not <br /> be materially detrimental to the purpose of this title or to other property in the same <br /> zone." <br /> . Brasaemle suggested that the Planning Commission modify the Code to require <br /> architectural drawings on variance applications that come before the Commission. <br /> Ericson quoted from Code: "All proposed industrial, commercial, and residential <br /> developments and expansions of existing facilities, except developments where public <br /> utilities and streets have previously been installed and the erection of no more than two <br /> detached single-family dwellings are planned must be reviewed by the City." This <br /> statement would make a developmental review necessary for the type of project that the <br /> Overtons are having constructed. <br /> Jopke suggested developing a code requirement that ties existing conditions to the <br /> proposed new development. <br /> Brasaemle suggested verbiage as follows: "Any expansion of an existing facility that <br /> requires a variance has to go through a development review." <br /> Peterson stated: "Politically and historically the City is stuck with letting people do <br /> whatever they want to do, appearancewise." <br /> Ericson suggested getting the Council's feedback on the issue. Have them make a <br /> judgement as to whether or not the Code language is acceptable or if it needs to be <br /> amended to try to solve this type of problem. <br /> • <br />