CC PACKET 04241990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission meeting April 17 , 1990 Page 3 2 Commissioner Faust indicated his concern with the conformity of the 3 project with other front yard setbacks in -adjacent properties and the 4 safety factor of having only 15 feet of driveway which even one normal 5 sized car would fill . 6 7 Commissioner Wagner said he was also concerned with the length of 8 drive-way to accommodate the vehicles but his greatest concern was 9 the size of the variance, 20 feet which would make the new garages so 10 far out of alignment with other front yards in the same area . 11 12 Commissioner Hansen said he was also concerned about the safety factor 13 with parking even two cars on only 15 feet of driveway exiting onto that 14 busy street . He imagined that a driver would almost be out in the street 15 before he or she had a chance to judge the speed of approaching vehicles . 16 17 Commissioner Brownell questioned whether the three questions which the 18 applicant had to answer affirmatively on the Petition for Variance could 19 realistically have been answered thus for this project . He perceived 20 the variance relieved more of an inconvenience than an undue hardship; 21 saw no extraordinary circumstance related to that particular parcel to 22 justify a variance , and did not agree that the City Ordinance caused 23 any particular difficulty or hardship for the property owners . He indi- 24 cated he would therefore oppose granting the variance. 25 26 Commissioner Werenicz also questioned the validity of affirmative replies 27 to the three questions and joined the other Commissioners in their 28 opposition to the variance. 29 30 Chairperson Madden said the magnitude of the discrepancy in structure 31 alignment with adjacent properties in addition to the problem the shorter 32 driveway might pose for the City snow removal plows prompted his 33 opposition to granting the variance . 34 35 `lotion by Werenicz , seconded by Wagner to recommend that the City Council 36 deny the request for a 20 foot variance from the 35 foot front yard set- 37 backs maintained by adjacent properties for two double garages in front 38 of the double bungalow at 2608/10 37th Avenue N. E. finding that ( 1) the 39 Commission did not perceive the three questions in the variance applicatic 40 could be answered in the affirmative; ( 2 ) the safety factors and potential 41 problems with the sewer line with the construction justified the denial 42 of the variance as well as ( 3) the lack of precedence for granting similar 43 requests in the past . 44 45 Motion carried unanimously. 46 47 Zoning Change for Self-Service Storage Project at Apache Tabled to 48 Allow Additional Notification of Property Owners in the Same Area 49 50