My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.2. SR 12-16-2002
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2002
>
12/16/2002
>
6.2. SR 12-16-2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:32:00 AM
Creation date
12/13/2002 7:59:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
12/16/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Memo to City Council <br />December 16, 2002 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br /> Other properties in the same district do not have the same characteristics (lot size, <br /> terrain, vegetation) that limit the land that is available to construct additional garage <br /> space. Other properties do have detached garages. <br /> <br />The special conditions are not a consequence of the applicant's actions or inactions. The <br />spedal conditions relate to the physical characteristics of the site and the location of the <br />house, well and septic field. The house was purchased in its existing condition by the <br />applicant. <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />The granting of this variance would not be injurious to or adversely affect the health, <br />safety or welfare of the residents of the city or the neighborhood where the property is <br />located. The removal of oak trees may in fact produce oak wild in the area if not done <br />properly. <br /> <br />Board of Adjustments Actions <br /> <br />At the November 26, 2002 meeting, the Board of Adjustments fek that the loss of trees was <br />not a significant hardship and stated findings for denial of the variance as "conditions of the <br />criteria are not met, especially number three." One member did not feel that significant tree <br />removal was more important than meeting the setback requirements. <br /> <br />There was no public opposition at the public hearing. <br /> <br />The Board of Adjustments voted 6-1 to deny both the applicant's proposal as well as staff <br />Option A. <br /> <br />The Board of Adjustments was not presented any testimony of the applicant's physical <br />conditions. It was brought to staff's attention after the November 26, 2002 meeting. <br /> <br />Recommendation <br /> <br />Staff believes that the applicant's proposal has more architectural curb appeal over staff <br />Option A. Option A will make the house appear to be a long narrow structure. With the <br />applicant's proposal, the garage would be skewed creating visual interest to the faqade. <br />Either option will require a variance. <br /> <br />Staff recommends that the City Council grant the variance request, as proposed by the <br />applicant, of the front yard setbacks from 35-feet to 23-feet on the Lowell Street side and <br />from 35-feet to 18-feet on the 198th Avenue side. The recommendation is based on the <br />following findings: <br /> <br />S:KPLANNING\Case Files\V 02-08 Peril\V02-08 CC.DOC <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.