Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />August 22, 2000 <br /> <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />Council Business. continued <br /> <br />Johnson said there is a need for additional police enforcement at this intersection, and <br />feels the original proposal would have greatly depreciated his home's value. <br /> <br />John McDonald asked ifPrebonich applied for the variance on July 28 due to indication it <br />would be approved. Teague verified that July 28 was merely a deadline date for Planning <br />Commission applications to allow for public notification. Teague met with Prebonich <br />before purchasing the property and explained the hardship criteria would be difficult to <br />meet and the variance most likely would be denied. Teague told Prebonich that staff <br />would recommend denial, however, Prebonich wished to go forward. <br /> <br />Prebonich said an addition to the back ofthe garage would be too cost prohibitive and <br />because the neighborhood is against a detached structure, the only alternative is the <br />attached garage. Samuelson noted concern of the division amongst the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Moore-Sykes confirmed the garage addition proposal was the result ofthe mediation <br />session. <br /> <br />Hoffman verified the addition would meet Prebonich's existing and future needs, and <br />thanked the residents for their patience. <br /> <br />Samuelson added the Public Safety Commission could review the neighborhood traffic <br />concerns. <br /> <br />Faust feels Prebonich is greatly disrupting an area which greatly valued by its residents. <br /> <br />Fuhr questioned if the variance were granted what if any ordinancc would preclude <br />Prebonich from adding a driveway off 17th St. Prebonich stated no intention to construct <br />a driveway. Teague said the Code would allow a driveway off 17th St., but the <br />neighborhood could create a homeowners association with private covenants to deter this <br />from occurring. <br /> <br />One resident believes the proposal was not approved at the arbitration. Larson rciterated <br />that staff or Council did not become involved with the arbitration. Another resident stated <br />this option was agreed to be a better compromise than the rear yard garage. Teague said it <br />is inaccurate to say this option was agreed upon by all, but the consensus was some type <br />of attached addition versus detached. <br /> <br />Finley questioned the original petition supporting no accessory structures which was <br />developed to prevent the construction of the Prebonich garage. She was stunned by the <br />varied descriptions from neighbors who signed the petition of the garage's use and size. <br />Her goal is to heal the neighborhood and allow residents to emote in a controlled situation. <br /> <br />Samuelson asked if language could be included stating that each variance should be <br />reviewed on its merits. <br /> <br />City Attorney Charlie LeFevere said granting a variance does not create a legally binding <br />precedent. Council is not bound to past decisions, but if a similar variance were denied, <br />an individual may challenge such decision as arbitrary and unreasonable due to previous <br />action. Granting a variance does not effectively change the zoning ordinance. <br /> <br />Council Business <br /> <br />1706 18th Ave <br />Variance - Garage <br />Construction <br />Report 00-195 <br />Resolution 00-074 <br />