My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC PACKET 06221993
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1993
>
CC PACKET 06221993
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 8:23:53 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 8:23:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
30
SP Folder Name
CC PACKETS 1990-1994
SP Name
CC PACKET 06221993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
I REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING . <br /> 1P JUNE 8 , 1993 <br /> PAGE 5 <br /> 4 <br /> 5 <br /> 6 Mr . Henry i's requesting a garage setback permit to construct <br /> 7 a second twenty-two feet x twenty-four feet double garage with <br /> 8 an eighteen -foot sideyard setback . in the backyard to match the <br /> 9 grandfathered sideyard setback of the existing house . <br /> 10 <br /> 11 .-Commissioner Franzese advised the Planning Commission is <br /> 12 recommending denial of this request . Members of the Commission <br /> 13 had suggested that a garage could be built closer to the <br /> 14 house. Also, there were objections from some of Mr . Henry ' s <br /> 15 neighbors . <br /> 16 <br /> 17 Staff had noted that this request did not exactly meet the <br /> 18 intent of the garage setback permit process in that there is <br /> 19 already a two car garage on the property. It was also noted <br /> 20 that the second garage would accommodate the concerns of the <br /> 21 Council regarding the storage of boats and recreational <br /> 22 vehicles but still did not meet the spirit of the permit . <br /> 23 <br /> 24 The Mayor observed that one of the reasons the Council has put <br /> 25 a permit process in place was to address vehicles and <br /> 26 recreational equipment left outside. <br /> 0 At-.the Planning Commission meeting, Mr . Henry was asked why he <br /> 29 didn ' t make an addition to his existing garage. He responded <br /> 30 that the bids on an addition would cost about $33 , 000 whereas <br /> 31 a detached garage would cost about $14 , 000 . At . the Council <br /> 32 Meeting he explained that the extra expense for the addition <br /> 33 was due to the footings necessary for the attachment . For a <br /> 34 detached garage only a floating slab was needed . <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Councilmember Enrooth inquired if this request would have met <br /> 37 the criteria for approval under the old ordinance . The City <br /> 38 Manager said a hardship would have to be proven . He felt in <br /> 39 the truest sense of "hardship" it would never meet the <br /> 40 definition . <br /> 41 <br /> 42 The City Manager felt enforcement of banning parking of <br /> 43 recreational vehicles outside or on a driveway would be very <br /> 44 difficult . He suggested that some conditions which addressed <br /> 45 this could be put into the permit . Mr . Henry stated that one <br /> 46 of his reasons for requesting this permit is so he will have <br /> 47 inside coverage for some of his recreational vehicles and <br /> 48 equipment and does not want to park them on his driveway . He <br /> 49 felt this would be more acceptable to his neighbors . <br /> 50 <br /> • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.