HomeMy WebLinkAboutgr00090_000042_pg318November 3, 1976 Page 8
Councilmember Rowley stated that the public should be aware that
the Council is thinking in terms of a two year program or longer
and ask if they would let the Council know what their ideas are.
Mayor Pickar agreed with this suggestion.
ATTORNEY MEYER'S REPORT Attorney Meyers read Legal Opinion 76 -4
to the Council regarding the construction of the garage on an
undeveloped lot. The legal opinion deals with the question of
whether or not the building inspector can deny a request for the
construction of a private garage on an undeveloped lot where there
is no principle structure. Attorney Meyers stated that a garage
is strictly an accessory use subordinate to the principle structure
and that the City would not be found to be acting arbitrarily by
refusing the issuance of a building permit for the construction
of a garage building prior to a building permit for the principle
structure.
Mr. Hugh Dickenson, 8068 Eastwood, stated that he has had a home
on one lot since 1959. In 1962 he bought the other lot. He
applied for a garage permit and was told it was refused. He
stated he has lost three days of work trying to get something
done. He said he has a nice home and keeps the grass cut and
looking nice. Mr. Dickenson explained he wants the garage to
put his cars, lawn mower and other equipment in.
Attorney Meyers stated he felt the City can refuse to issue a
building permit and he feels the courts will uphold the City in
this decision.
Mr. Dickenson stated that one of the members on the Planning
Commission has what he is requesting and asked why his request
is being denied. "Mayor Pickar stated that the other situation
may only involve one lot.
Mr. Dickenson stated that the Council is stopping the building of
a home on this other lot and is trying to force him to combine
the two lots, which would cost $400. Mr. Dickenson stated he has
paid taxes on both lots and has paid all of the assessments. This
property could be used for a house later and he sees no reason why
he can't be allowed to build a garage on it. He stated he does
not think the ordinance applies to this type of case. Mr. Dickenson
stated there is a three car garage on Red Oak Drive where a variance
was given on the side property line. Mr. Dickenson said he had to
pay $50 for that legal opinion from the Attorney. He said he has
planted trees and shrubs on the other lot and keeps it looking nice.
Mayor Pickar stated that if only one lot was involved he could
have a garage and asked why qtr. Dickenson would sell the lot
with the garage on it.