1990 02 12BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS MINUTES
FEBRUARY 12, 1990
MEMBERS PRESENT: Willard Johnson, Carol Watson and Jay Johnson
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director and Jo Ann Olsen,
Senior Planner
A 1 Foot 11 Inch Rear Yard Variance to Enlarge an Existing
Non-Conforming Shed, James McAllister, 620 Fox Hill Drive
Staff presented the staff report to the Board.
Krauss stated that the survey provided by the applicant as part
of the report was not an official survey and it appeared that the
applicant knew about the procedure for receiving a building per-
mit and yet did not proceed with the correct application.
The applicant stated that the hardship was in the form of money
and that their house burned down and they are trying to improve
the property. He stated that he has improved the cabin into a
single family home and that the city did not require a permit for
the original improvements to the cabin. The applicant stated
that there had been 12 inspections on the site during 1989 and
during the second general building permit inspection, the inspec-
tor saw the shed. The applicant stated that he hired pro-
fessionals to build the shed and they located it in the wrong
location. The applicant stated that the city told him he could
rebuild the existing shed on the existing foundation and there
was a misunderstanding between himself and the building inspec-
tor. The applicant stated that he was told he could not finish
until he received a variance and he has not been able to complete
the shed since August of 1989.
Watson stated that what had occurred is an expansion of a non-
conforming use and that the applicant went beyond the existing
slab.
Olsen stated that staff informs applicants that they can rebuild
structures on existing slabs but they cannot locate any closer to
the lot line or expand beyond the existing foundation. Staff
then stated that had a building permit had been applied for the
survey would have shown that the shed was going beyond the
existing condition and staff would have stopped construction of
the shed.
Jay Johnson stated that there was no hardship but if the appli-
cant did receive misinformation, there was some hardship created
by the city. He stated that there would be some financial
hardship if the applicant was required to tear down the shed and
rebuild it.
Watson stated that financial hardship is not a hardship to grant
a variance.
Johnson asked the applicant how much money it would be to move
the structure.
Board of Adjustments Minutes
February 12, 1990
Page 2
The applicant stated that it would be at least $1000.
Watson questioned what the building permit stated. She asked if
it exactly states what is being permitted.
The applicant stated that you can get a general permit which
allows any expansions to the site.
Staff stated that they have never heard of a general permit and
any development of a site requires a specific building permit
with specific information.
The Board of Adjustments stated that they wanted information on
the history of the permit.
Johnson recommended tabling the item, seconded by Watson. Ail
voted in favor on tabling the item until staff could provide a
history on the permit.