Laserfiche WebLink
1 -2- <br /> 2 <br /> 3-Proponents: --Robert Fickle told Commissioner Madden he intends to. • <br /> 4 ­ . -replace the existing roof and• the - ridge of the 1-1/2 <br /> 5 story addition would be .higher on the east end; <br /> 6 <br /> 7 -told Commissioner Hansen he -and his wife, Susan, . who <br /> V was with' him at the hearing, perceived they needed the <br /> 9 additional living space cited in their application, and <br /> 10 the shape and position of the existing house would not <br /> 11 permit the addition to be' constructed at the required <br /> 12 setback; <br /> 13 <br /> 14 -confirmed that the 'home to the east protruded even far- <br /> 15 they into the required front yard setback. <br /> 16 <br /> 17 -Richard Ott, 2618 - 30th Avenue N.E. was present, but <br /> 18 did not speak. <br /> 19 <br /> 20 *No one spoke against the variance and the hearing was closed at 7: 47 <br /> 21 P.M. <br /> 22 <br /> 23 Commission Recommendation <br /> 24 <br /> 25 Motion by Madden; seconded by Wagner to recommend .the City Council grant <br /> 26 the necessary front yard setback variance to. allow Robert and Susan <br /> 27 Fickle to construct the addition to the east side of their existing home <br /> 28 at 2614 - 30th Avenue N.E. shown on the sketch included with their <br /> 29 application in the June 16, 1987 Planning Commission agenda packet. In • <br /> 30 recommending the variance be granted, the Commission finds that: ... <br /> 31 <br /> 32 -the existing house is a legal non-conforming use and the proposed <br /> 33 addition would not additionally encroach into the required frontyard <br /> 34 setback; <br /> 35 <br /> 36 -it appears the addition would be a definite improvement to the appear <br /> 37 ance of the property; <br /> 38 <br /> 39 -the variance would permit an addition which would fit a reasonable <br /> 40 floor plan; <br /> 41 <br /> 42 -the addition would be behind already established front yard sight <br /> 43 lines in that block; <br /> 44 <br /> 45 -all three conditions required to be satisfied affirmatively before a. <br /> 46 variance can be granted have been met with this proposal. and had been <br /> 47 satisfactorily addressed by the applicants on their application <br /> 48 <br /> 49 -no one spoke against the variance during the hearing and staff <br /> 50 - reported receiving no calls or letters in opposition to the addition <br /> 51 prior to the hearing. <br /> 52 <br /> 53 Motion carried unanimously. <br /> 54 • <br />