2000-04-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Meeting Minutes April 25, 2000 Page 4 Council Business. continued The frontyard addition is requested because the applicants do not wish to expand into the backyard due to its small size and use as a play area. The applicant feels the hardship is caused by the home's location, small lot size, and inability to construct a second story addition. Nearby property owners have signed a petition of support for the variance. While the request does seem reasonable, staff has difficultly determining hardship or unique circumstance. The City has not made practice in granting variances for additions to the front of homes, particularly living spaces, and previously granted frontyard variances were for garage additions and unique lot configurations. Teague feels this structure could be located anywhere else on the lot without the need for a variance, and denial would not preclude reasonable use of the property or create a hardship. Based on the facts, staff and Planning Commission recommend denial of the variance. Larson visited with the applicants to determine other options which do not require a variance. A 12-x-12 ft. bedroom would not require a variance, but approval ofa Special Use Permit. Moore-Sykes noted the importance of constructing an addition in a manner which will retain the resale value of a home. She feels the site offers other possibilities which would not require the need for a variance. Samuelson feels the arrangements are small for a family of five, but there seems to be alternatives such as expanding into the backyard or reducing the room's size. It is difficult to allow encroachments into frontyards, and supporting this variance could set precedence. Gunderman agrees with the findings ofthe Planning Commission. Hoffman agreed there seems to be opportunities to construct the addition in another location or reduce the proposed size. Applicant, Rebecca Brabeck, said constructing into the front yard is financially feasible for them and does not require great modification to the home. She is unaware of the Special Use Permit process and would like to investigate. Moore-Sykes noted that ifBraback is interested in the Special Use Permit, she should contact staff for further details. Motion by Moore-Sykes, seconded by Samuelson, to WAIVE THE READING AND ADOPT THE RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF VNOO-2. 5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried. Teague presented a request for a lot width variance and minor subdivision of two lots located at 2924 16th St. NW. The existing home on the southern portion gains access off 16th St., and the northern lot would gain access off a platted right-of-way (ROW) which extends off Valerie Ln. A 16.82 ft. lot width variance is requested due to the current 58.18 ft. lot width being short of the 75 ft. minimum width requirement. Both lots would meet the minimum lot size requirement of 10,000 sq. ft. Council Business Front Yard Setback Variance - 711 9th Ave. NW Report 00-103 Resolution 00-033 Minor lot Subdivision and lot width variance 2924 16t1' St. NW Report OO~ 1 04 Resolution 00-034 Resolution 00-035