PL MINUTES 04161996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes • April 16, 1996 Page 3 1 3. The variance will not alter the character of the locality. If granted, the variances will 2 not cause an alteration of the established residential character of the area. 3 Strict enforcement of the setback requirements would, therefore, cause undue hardship. 4 Chair Bergstrom closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. 5 Chair Bergstrom inquired if the original preliminary plat depicted 16 foot setbacks on the lot 6 lines. Ms. Moore-Sykes replied that the preliminary plat depicted 25 foot setbacks, and that 7 the hearth rooms were within the 25 foot setbacks. 8 Commissioner Franzese inquired if the Reids had been notified of this public hearing and if 9 there were any comments. Ms. Moore-Sykes stated everyone within a 350 foot radius had 10 been notified and no one had contacted City Hall regarding this public hearing. 11 Bruce Nedegaard, President of Nedegaard Custom Homes, reviewed the plat map with the 12 Planning Commission. Discussion was held on the intended location of the hearth rooms. 9 Commissioner Franzese inquired if the original blueprints showed the correct location of the q � P 14 hearth rooms. Mr. Nedegaard stated the blueprints were correct, but the survey is not. He 15 stated the hearth room locations throughout the entire subdivision are incorrect, but that only 16 Lots 8 and 10 are not within the required setbacks. 17 Chair Bergstrom inquired if a new plat will have to be filed. Mr. Nedegaard replied he 1.8 would not have to file a new plat, as this affects the rear yard setbacks only. 19 Commissioner Gondorchin stated the criteria for reasonable use and circumstances created 20 by the owner could be argued. He stated that the units could indeed be used as originally 2.1 intended without the hearth rooms, and that even though the owner personally did not create 22 the hardship, an individual acting on the owner's behalf did. 23 Chair Bergstrom agreed with Commissioner Gondorchin's argument, but felt the Planning 24 .Commission would not be setting a precedent nor negatively affect the community if the 25 variance was approved. 26 Commissioner Franzese disagreed with Commissioner Gondorchin's argument, and stated 27 unreasonable use is anything other than the original intended use, and that the owner spersonally did not create the hardship.