Loading...
1989 05 22BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS MINUTES MAY 22, 1989 MEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Carol Watson and Ursula Dimler STAFF PRESENT: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner TWENTY-ONE FOOT VARIANCE TO THE REQUIRED 30 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, 7307 LAREDO DRIVE, LEIGH AND JUDY COLBY Staff presented the report. Mr. Colby stated that the Ursula Dimler has looked at the site and has seen that there is no place for additional storage. He stated that they wanted to maintain privacy and actually the front yard acts as a back yard. He stated that the hardship is the need for storage of boats and truck and that the neighbors would prefer this because they used to be stored inside. Dimler asked if they could get the boat and truck in the garage. Mr. Colby stated no because it was not a standard width garage and that they would have to take out their cars to store the boat and truck. Dimler stated that she agreed that tuck under garages were impractical. Watson asked how far it was between the right-of-way just to make sure that there was room for right-of-way improvements if needed. Johnson felt that the proposed addition was too close to the street. Mr. Colby stated that the garage is too close then the trees are too close. Watson stated that trees and buildings are seen differently. Johnson stated that he did not like reducing the front yard set- back. Mr. Colby stated that the sidewalk was already on the other side and that if it was ever extended it would stay on that side of the street. Dimler stated that she does not feel that it acts a front yard and sees it as a side yard. Mr. Colby stated that the front yard was unusable. Bill Boyt stated that the variance has to meet all five of the conditions and that this proposed variance meets only two of them and if the variance was granted it would set a precedence for a 21 foot front yard variance for a second garage. Board of Adjustments and Appeals Minutes - May 22, 1989 Page 2 Watson moved, seconded by Johnson, to deny the variance. Watson and Johnson voted in favor. Dimler was opposed. Dimler voted against the motion and felt that it does meet two of the criteria and they have the right to have a boat and truck stored inside and felt that there was no harm in granting the variance. Johnson moved, seconded by Dimler to close the meeting.