Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Zoning Adjustments Meeting October 12, 2006 - page 3 <br />a variance from the maximum width, as well as approval from Council for an encroachment <br />agreement to allow the driveway to be located within the six-foot drainage and utility easement <br />located along the property line. He explained the application had been evaluated by staff and it <br />was found it did not meet the criteria for the granting of a variance. The applicant's desire to <br />increase the driveway was a self-created hardship. The strict enforcement of the ordinance <br />would not cause undue hardship because a 24 -foot driveway was adequate to access a garage and <br />the pad between the garage and property line could be removed or reduced. <br />Schumann commented there could be an issue with the utility easement. <br />The CDD stated policy was to prohibit encroachment into easements with permanent structures. <br />Schumann had visited the site and noticed other homes in the area had similar structures with <br />double garages and class five rock to expand the driveways. He questioned whether that was <br />any more attractive. He pointed out there had been discussions on parking trailers and campers <br />on the side of garages and he was reluctant to require the driveway be removed when the <br />ordinance may be revised to require those items be parked there. He said the drainage and utility <br />easement was a separate issue and staff needed to look into whether there were any utilities in <br />the easement. <br />Brunotte asked if the retaining wall was in the easement as well. <br />The CDD said it was and pointed out where the wall was located on the property line. <br />Schumann opened the public hearing. <br />Mike Cirecis, 6212 147th Street North, said he lived next to the applicant and the driveway was <br />not noticeable, it looked nice and the wall was well built. He said it would be a shame to have <br />him remove it. <br />Puleo asked about the encroachment in the easement. <br />The CDD said the Council could approve an encroachment agreement to allow it. <br />Schumann made motion, Puleo seconded, to table the item until the next meeting to allow staff <br />to determine if there were any issues regarding the easement. <br />All Ayes. Motion carried. <br />Adjournment <br />Puleo made motion, Brunotte seconded, to adjourn at 7:27 p.m. <br />All Ayes. Motion carried. <br />