PCMin_89Oct2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES . REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 2, 1989 Vice-Chair Finegan called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. PRESENT Duncan, Daykin, Boche, Grittner, Nestingen, Finegan and Barry. Also present were Council Liaison Wallin and Planner Susan Hoyt Taff. ABSENT Black and Carroll. SEPTEMBER 11, 1989 MINUTES APPROVED Nestingen moved, seconded by Barry, approval of the September 11, 1989 Planning Commission Minutes as presented. Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE REQUEST FROM HERBERT HORTON, 1468 WEST CALIFORNIA Herbert Horton, 1468 West California Avenue, requested a variance to construct a temporary wheelchair ramp in his front yard. Mr. Horton was not present. Mrs. Horton broke her leg and will be confined to a wheelchair for a period of from three to twelve months. • Due to the placement of his garage, the narrow gate in rear yard. and angle of steps, he is unable to place such a ramp in the rear exit. A temporary variance was granted to Mr. Horton on September 15th due to the emergency hardship as Mrs. Horton would be trapped in her home in the case of a fire. Barry moved, seconded by Grittner, 'to reapprove the variance request for a period not to exceed twelve (12) months contingent upon the wheelchair ramp passing the inspection of the Building Inspector. The variance is granted due to the hardship of the location, and the safety and welfare of the resident. Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE REQUEST FROM CARNELIS DUIJNDAM, 1179 FAIRVIEW AVENUE NORTH Mr. Duijndam, 1749 Fairview Avenue North, requested a variance to construct a new garage which extends beyond the front of the principal structure. Staff Planner Susan Hoyt Taff advised that a variance would not be required for the construction of the attached garage because Mr. Duijndam will be extending his principal structure along with his garage. The extension of the principle structure with the attached garage does not require a variance because it meets the height and setback requirements in the Code. Furthermore, the Code also defines any structure within twelve (12) feet of the principle structure as part of the principle structure. Using this interpretation in the Code, the attached garage would be considered part of the principle structure. And, therefore, no variance would be required. The variance request was withdrawn and the fee wia_1 be refunded. • Staff Planner Susan Hoyt Taff will review the City Code to determine where language defining an accessory structure is contradictory