03-24-1992 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Planning Commission Mintues March 24, 1992 Page 6 Mr. Paul Quam felt it would be setting a precedent for adjoining lots. Tammie Finstad, 12673 212th Avenue, concurred with the neighbors that she would like to see openness and felt it would block their view. Paul Whalen addressed the five standards stating that he did not feel they had a hardship because of the lay of the land. They could bring in fill and set their house further back. steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, stated Planning Commission has to base their decision on the five for a variance not by a popular vote of the neighborhood. that the standards Sue Lundquist felt that they could meet the setbacks by moving the house back. Chairman Nadeau closed the public hearing. Commissioner Minton felt that if the same soil conditions run north and south the applicant could shift the house 20 feet to the north without any major difficulties. Staff had to agree with Commissioner Minton, that if the same soil conditions run north and south, the house could be moved and still meet all the setbacks. After discussing this issue, The Planning Commission was in agreement. COMMISSIONER EBERLEY MOVED TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY CHARLES & ANN CHRISTENSEN BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: THAT THE HARDSHIP TO THE PETITIONERS IS NOT ALONE DUE TO THE LAY OF THE LAND, BUT ECONOMICS. AlSO THAT BECAUSE THERE IS NO DELINEATION OF THE WETLANDS IT WAS PREMATURE TO CITE THE WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT AS A HARDSHIP. COMMISSIONER MINTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-0. A short 10 minute recess was taken at this time. 7. Consider Conditional Use Permit Request (Home Occupation/Addition) by David Erbstoesser/P.H. Janelle Szklarski, Zoning Assistant, explained that David & Ardyce Erbstoesser of 11796 191st Avenue are requesting a conditional use permit to construct a 1,024 addition to an existing detached accessory building in order to accommodate a home occupation for wood craft products. Ms. Szklarski, briefly reviewed the concerns as submitted in Richard Vagts' letter. She stated that Mr. Vagts had no concerns on the way the Erbstoessers were conducting their business, but on the size of the building. Staff is recommending approval of the home occupation at its present size, but denial of the expansion of the existing building. Staff feels that the proposed expansion would be detrimental to the neighborhood because of its size. Mr. Erbstoesser stated that he planned to retire and needed the additional area for their wood craft products.