1981.10.19 CC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

October 19, 1981 James Hehn - House plans for 816 square feet Mr. Hehn, son-in-law of Marlowe Lindau, is proposing the construction of an 816 sq ft house on property recently divided by Mr. Lindau. The Planning Commission had discussed this matter at their meeting, and determined that a finished base- ment could be considered in the square footage (ord requires 960 sq ft) . Mr. Crever was present, and stated that he has been interpreting the ordinance that the main floor of a single family dwelling should consist of a minimum of 960 sq ft. , (single story house) . It was the concensus of the Council that the Building Inspector's interpretation was correct and valid. There was much dis- cussion about the definition. of a basement and percent of grade. Mrs. Peltier was present, and inquired about earth homes and how they meet the grade requirements. LaValle stated that the ordinance is not clear when considering requirements for earth homes. As a solution to the problem, it was suggested that Mr.Hehn raise his house so that it is out of the ground 4 feet solving the grade problem, and maybe a possible water problem, because of the contour of the land. Richard Granger - George King Property Mr. Granger has recently purchased the King property from Washington County. The lot is presently zoned CB, and Granger has applied for a rezoning to SFU. The lot would also need a variance for square footage (8,000 instead of required 10,400) . LaValle stated that some time ago he had dealt with Washington County regarding this piece of property. The county supposedly would keep the lot in lieu of the city waiving the sewer assessment and abatement of a nuisance bill for cleanup after a fire. There was nothing ever documented to prove that this actually happened, and Mr. Granger has since purchase the property from the county. The city was rather reluctant to see the lot improved because of the lack of sight for the railroad tracks abutting the property. Mrs. Peltier felt that the city would be creating a substandard lot in the SFU zone if the rezoning request was approved. There was much discussion and review of ordinances regarding substandard lots. You cannot create a substandard lot in subdivision, but no one could locate any reference to .that in the rezoning requirements. Granger felt that he would have less opposition from the neighbors for a residence rather than a commercial business. He stated that he would construct the house in such a way as to provide the best line of vision for motorists. Irsfeld questioned whether the city should even be involved with the sight problem. Kuusisto stated that where safety is involved, tlecity is involved. There was discussion about rezoning the entire from CB to SFU. LaValle stated that Metro required the land abutting the railroad tracks to be zoned CB for approval of ourComprehensive Plan. McAllister stated that it was his opinion that Mr. Granger should continue with his applications for rezoning and variance. He also suggested that Mr.' Granger provide some type of Site Plan for the lot. Mr. Granger stated that he will have the lot staked for property line and the proposed structure so that the Council can make another inspection of the lot. 6.0 ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTIONS The council stated that the Ordinance Committee should be looking at the following changes: 1 ) moving in homes, 2) construction standards (exterior) , and 3) re- quirements for earth homes. 7.0 UNFINISHED BUSINESS No discussion.