Laserfiche WebLink
<br />P~Q~EST FOR CO~NCIL ACTION <br /> <br />vATl..: <br /> <br />9-25-89 <br /> <br />ITE...\If !~O.: ,. <br /> <br />Department Apprcval: <br />'! Ii"; <br />~' ! \ U: <br />v' v.... <br /> <br />~ar.ager Revie.ed: <br /> <br />Age:!:da Section: <br /> <br />\../ <br /> <br />~",Jt2~~ <br /> <br />Ccnsent Agenda <br /> <br />, ; <br />--- <br /> <br />Ite~ Description: <br /> <br />James Muel:ner request for a ~inor variance at <br />374 S. McCarrcns Boulevard. <br /> <br />The Minor Variance Committ~e convened Septewber <br />unaniw.ously reco:amenc.ed approval of Mr. Muellni!:r's <br />minor varia~ce at 374 So McCarrons Bo~levard. <br /> <br />14, 1989 and <br />req'J.est for a <br /> <br /> <br />Mr. Huel! ,;er .h::hes to expand his existing single car garage into a <br />dcub~e ;;;ar gara~e by adding 1:: ;.:eet onto the nozt.'1 e.nd cf tile <br />attached garage. The ex} stir;g d..ell ing does not cor.form to 'i.:h~ <br />C;ty's front yard se~ack ~aquirement in that it is se~ck 28 feet <br />i~stead oi the requirec 30 feet, Therefore, the minor variance is <br />ne.:essary to expand the :lon-conforming structure. The proposed <br />garage would me€t all required setbacks. <br /> <br />The Minor Variance C01lU"iji ttee dete=mined ~hat this was a reason3ble <br />re:::ruest b~cause tile prc~t:as~d exp3m;j on meets setback requirements <br />and the only alternativt! f:>r b~inging the structure i,.to complian<:e <br />is to ~ove the existing dwelling. <br /> <br />All impacted neiqhbc~s 5~pport~d ~he prcject. <br /> <br />Require!!;ent: <br />Proposed: <br />Variance: <br />t 'lariance: <br /> <br />o feet <br />8 f€'E:t <br />feet <br /> <br />'- <br />." <br /> <br />CO~NCIL ACTION ~~QCESTED: <br /> <br />M0tion tv approve. deny Jamc-.s 1-!ueilner '5 <br />rc.:;uest for a <:1in~r variance at )74 S. <br />~c(:arl-ons 8o\.:lev.a~d. <br /> <br />--- <br />