Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Approved <br /> <br />November 15, 2005 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MOTION CARRIED to recommend APPROVAL. <br />5 Ayes, 0 Nays. <br /> <br /> <br />General Business: VN05-03 Front yard setback variance and Type 4 <br />Nonconforming use permit to expand the existing single family home at 2830 <br />Forestdale Road. <br /> <br />Consideration of a new site plan for the single family parcel at 2830 Forestdale Road. On <br />September 20, 2005, the Planning Commission considered the request and recommended <br />a Variance to the front yard setback and a Type 4 Non-conforming Use Permit in the R-1, <br />th <br />Single Family Residential district. On September 28, the Council approved the non- <br />conforming use permit and tabled action on the variance request. The applicant presented <br />th <br />an alternate plan on September 28; the Council directed the applicant to review the new <br />site plan with Staff and the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />The subject site has a single family home that encroaches into the front yard setback; the <br />owners wish to add a family room in the back. The owners also wish to add a third stall <br />on their garage which would encroach into the required 30 front yard setback by 9 feet, <br />but would follow the set back line created by the existing garage. <br /> <br />Schiferl stated that he doesn’t want to create a precedent that the citizens of New <br />Brighton are guaranteed a third car garage. The applicants have other options and have <br />not proven that there is an undo hardship. Zisla replied that while he agrees with <br />Schiferl’s statement, he feels that because the applicant has made changes to the original <br />site plan and has not furthered the encroachment into the setback that the application <br />should be approved. He also stated that this house is unique situation, because it is <br />already over the set back by nine feet and few houses would meet these distinctive <br />circumstances. <br /> <br />John Murphy, owner of Murphy Brothers, approached the Commission to answer a few <br />questions. He replied to O’Keefe’s question regarding two driveways and stated that the <br />original driveway would be demolished and a new driveway would be realigned to tie the <br />two garages together. Mr. Murphy also answered questions regarding the roof line of the <br />addition, and the curb cut width for the new driveway. <br /> <br />WAIVE THE READING AND ADOPT THE <br />Motion by Zisla, Second by O’Keefe to <br />ATTACHED RESOLUTION APPROVINGVN05-03. <br /> <br /> <br />MOTION CARRIED to recommend APPROVAL. <br />4 Ayes, 1 Nay. <br /> <br />I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\Minutes\2005\10-18-2005.doc <br /> <br />