Laserfiche WebLink
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br />AUGUST 13, 1985 <br />PAGE TWO <br />his plans, a variety of options would have been <br />available to him to still accomplish his purpose <br />These options would have been: <br />a. Eliminate the concrete slab off of his sliding <br />glass doors, thus having the deck directly <br />attached to the house which would have provided <br />needed distance for the storage building to be <br />located 5' off the property line. <br />b. Locate the storage building elsewhere on his <br />property and plant shrubs or other vegetative <br />growth that would have provided the necessary <br />visual obstructions. <br />c. A "fence" (railing) 6' in height is attached <br />to his deck and per building inspector Brian <br />Hoffman's interpretation of the Code this fence <br />could have been constructed to 8' in height thus <br />providing the visual barrier Mr.Boyles feels is <br />necessary to guarantee his privacy. <br />1 <br />3. In my conversation with Mr. Boyles on the 12th of <br />August he indicated that trees had previously been <br />located where he proposed to construct his storage <br />building and that he had cut them down even though <br />they provided the screening from his neighbor's <br />property, which is why he is requesting to construct <br />the building at the location indicated, as the trees <br />required maintenance and sooner or later they would <br />die and require removal which is an expensive <br />process. <br />Attached please find a copy of City Code Chapter 40.26, <br />Subdivision D which outlines the criteria for granting <br />variances. This section indicates that a variance may be <br />granted only in the event that all seven circumstances occur <br />and in the case of Mr. Boyles, circumstance B1 is most <br />applicable which states: <br />"Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to <br />the properties which do not apply generally to other <br />properties in the same zone or vicinity and result <br />from lot size or shape, topography or other <br />circumstances over which the owners of the property <br />since enactment of the Code have had no control." <br />In the case of Mr. Boyles I would submit that he has had <br />full and complete control of his property and that no <br />circumstances beyond his control have resulted in his <br />inability to deal with his privacy problem by means other <br />than the construction of the requested storage building. <br />