05-23-1989 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 6 Planning Commission Minutes May 23. 1989 . ,-' 9. THAT ANY FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO THI S SITE BE AS PER CITY CODE. 10. THAT THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE COMPLY WITH ALL BUILDING CODES. 11. ALL HARD SURFACING BE INSTALLED WITHIN 60 DAYS AFTER THE APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 12. THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BE SUBJECT TO A TWO YEAR REVIEW. COMMISSIONER FUCHS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 9. Variance Request by Mike Trunnell/P.H. Zoning Assistant. Steven Bjork explained that Mike Trunnell of 18565 Simonet Drive is requesting a variance for a 20 ft. encroachment on the 30 ft. m1n1mum front yard setback to accommodate a garage. This requirement is contingent upon a hardship being found for this property. Mr. Bjork reviewed the Findings of Fact as outlined in his memo dated May 23. 1989. and indicated staff is recommending denial based upon the five stand-ards. Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. . Mike Trunnell (the applicant) explained that both my wife and I work. therefore. we feel there is a safety problem with snow and ice on our vehicles in the winter time. The majority of the houses in the neighborhood have two car garages. We have an unusual shaped lot making it hard to build on. With the shape and size of the lot. narrow in front. we do not have a lot of options. We did not close in the one stall for living space. Being on a cul-de-sac traffic will be slow. therefore. I feel safety is not a problem in this issue. Harry Kreuser of 1910 6th Lane was in favor of the request. Mr. Kreuser explained that Mrs. Trunnell is a school teacher and Mike works for UPA plus drives an ambulance along with being on the fire department. He is not going to have time to scrape windows to get to an ambulance run or fire call on time. Likewise. Mrs. Trunnell should not have to scrape windows to teach our kids. I feel this is a hardship. Mr. Kreuser further indicated that the situation of the lot should be taken into consideration. Mr. Trunnell did not enclose one of the stalls for additional living space. Mr. Trunnell bought the property assuming he could build a garage. I consider this a hardship for the Trunnells. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. The Planning Commission discussed the issue of the cul-de-sac having a diameter of only 80 ft. Based on this. they felt that the small diameter of the cul-de-sac could create a safety problem in the area. By allowing this variance. snow plowing may be obstructed. . Commissioner Johnson indicated that she was not convinced this was a hardship based on the findings of fact. They bought the home knowing that there was only a single car garage. Because the applicant is proposing to locate the garage 10 ft. from the front property line. I feel that the vehicles will extend out into the surfacing of the cul-de-sac creating a safety problem. Commissioner Morton was in agreement with Commissioner Johnson.