CC 09-12-1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of Regular Council Meetio, September 12, 1983 Page Four ., Case No. 83~22, Side~ard Setback Variance, 1426 Russard Court ~ W.Y; Bauer Construction Council was referred to transparencies of Busssrd Addition plat map and Lot 16, and to a topographic map. Miller noted that at the time the lot was platted, a 20' setback was required from the side street right-of-way (40' required now). Miller explained that tbe applieant is requesting a 9' sid,eyard s,et- back variance from the Snelling Avenue rigbt-of-way line (31' from the property line); reported that the Roard of Appeala and Planning Commission recommend an 8' variance be approved to line this bouse with the house to the north, which was grsnted an 8' setback variance4lt based on the steep slope of the lot. Miller said this lot does not have the same slope, but may have soil problems, which could be considered a hardship. Miller noted tbat Council has not in the past accepted the 200' right-of-way as rationale for granting variances. Mr. Bauer described tbe soil,'co,nditions; noted tbat soil borings were taken in three locations; noted tbat tbe cost of the lot does not warrant a smaller house; needs 9' variance to accommodate a 24' garage; 8' variance will permit a 22' garage which would be accept- able. After discussion, Christiansen moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council approve an 8' sideyard setback variance from Snelling Avenue (32' from right-of-way). Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) Case No. 83-24, Variance for Garage Addition - 1777 Gramsie Road Council was referred to Board of Appeals report (8-31-83), Planning Commission recommendations (Minutes of 9-7-83) and Planning memo (8-29-83) . A transparency of the site plan indicating the proposed location of the garage/entry addition was shown. Miller noted that the existing house is 35~' from the Fairview Avenue right-of-way, a variance of 4~ ft. from the 40' currently required. Miller explained that the setback requirement was formerly 20' on corner lots. Miller noted that the house is a walk-out with windows both up and down; explained thst the addition, if moved to the 40' setback, would obscure the view from these windows; noted that the land drops off slightly to the west, requiring some fill, if addition is moved to the west. Miller noted that a 2' rear yard variance is also requested to accnw- modate the 10'x 10' entry and 24' garage. Miller reported that he sees no adverse impact on the neighborhood if the addition is aligned with the existing house; reported that applicant has letters from neighbors approving the addition as proposed; reported that the Board of Appeals recommends denial of both the sideyard and rearyard variances; Planning Commission recommends alignment of the addition with the house and approval of 2' rearyard variance. After discussion of the hardships found on which to grant a variance,. Hicks moved, seconded by Christiansen, that Council approve a 4~' sideyard setback v~riance for the proposed addition at the same set- back as the hO'Lle, l I i):, I'BTC'J."d unanimously. (5-0) Hicks moved, seconded by McAllister, that Council deny tbe rear- yard setback variance. Motion carried (Hicks, McAllister, Woodburn, Christiansen voting in faVor of the motion; Mulcahy voting in oppo- sition. (4-1). Change Order, Lexington Avenue Project, County Road F to County Road G-2 Miller reported that the change order proposed makes previous path- way connection almost impossible. A possible option for the correct- ion was suggested on the NSP easement. After discussion, Hicks moved, seconded by McAllister, that Council approve the change order for the Lexington Avenue project, including tfie chain link fence as'proposed on Drawing 18702003, Sheet 11 ofe 84 (Revision dated 8-18-83). -4-