My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 08202019
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2019
>
PL PACKET 08202019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/21/2019 10:31:08 AM
Creation date
8/15/2019 12:33:32 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
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
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes <br />April 16, 2019 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br /> 1 <br />Mr. Grittman noted a variance concern was received from David and Traci Wischmeier, 2617 2 <br />Pahl Avenue. They are requesting that the lot coverage variance and the encroachment/setback 3 <br />variance be denied. A variance concern addendum was also submitted addressing the applicants’ 4 <br />new zoning request presentation. Because a portion of the side yard paved space continues (in 5 <br />the current proposal) to be shown at more than 5 feet in width and closer than 5 feet to the side 6 <br />property line, a variance is still at issue for this dimension, although lesser in scope than 7 <br />originally required. As a result, variances from each of these three standards are required to 8 <br />proceed with the project as planned. 9 <br /> 10 <br />Mr. Grittman noted in reviewing the proposed improvements against the ordinance requirements, 11 <br />staff recommends approval of the front yard setback encroachment as proposed, denial of the 12 <br />side yard setback variance for the “patio”, and approval of the impervious surface coverage 13 <br />variance as modified to consist of a sidewalk no more than 5 feet wide. Staff has reviewed for 14 <br />height, yard setbacks, and other zoning standards; the request appears to meet all other code 15 <br />requirements. 16 <br /> 17 <br />Mr. Tom and Mrs. Lindsay Wernimont, 2609 Pahl Avenue, appeared before the Commission. 18 <br />Mrs. Wernimont distributed their revised proposal to the Commission. They appreciate the time 19 <br />City Staff has taken to address their project. The original basis is for what the builder submitted. 20 <br />The builder is removing the concrete because it was their error. There are two entrances. The 21 <br />plan for the front yard variance will be more warm and appealing. They are requesting the 36.7% 22 <br />impervious to allow for the sidewalk. They have made an adjustment at the end of the landing 23 <br />and showed a picture of the revision. They have been trying to get as close to the code as they 24 <br />can. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Mrs. Traci and Mr. David Wischmeier, 2617 Pahl Avenue, are the neighbors east of the property 27 <br />in question. They think the addition looks great and it is an improvement to the neighborhood. 28 <br />They are not concerned about the variance for the front yard setback. They do have issues about 29 <br />the side encroachment and amount of impervious lot coverage. They have been concerned about 30 <br />the site plan throughout the entire process. The patio has been poured within 1.2 feet from the 31 <br />shared property line in violation of the code which requires a 5-foot setback. They appreciate all 32 <br />the attempts the homeowners have engaged in their plans to make the side setback compliant. 33 <br />They do not feel 5 feet is customary in their neighborhood. These lots are close together. Ms. 34 <br />Wischmeier provided an arial shot of the neighborhood. The current sidewalks on other 35 <br />properties is 3-4 feet wide. The walkways to the back of the lot are 2-3 feet wide. They feel a 5-36 <br />foot walkway will change the character of the neighborhood. They are also concerned about the 37 <br />noise that will be generated from their entertainment space. They are concerned about privacy 38 <br />issues with a walkway between homes. This could also be a safety issue. The code was quoted 39 <br />that a 5-foot setback be adhered to and the walkway should be limited to 3 feet wide would go 40 <br />along with the character of the neighborhood. They have had water in their basement every year 41 <br />except last year. They are also concerned about the impervious amount. They hope a solution can 42 <br />be found that both parties can support. 43 <br /> 44 <br />Vice Chair Westrick closed the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. 45 <br /> 46
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.