My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2015 01 21
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
>
2001-2019 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
2015 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2015 01 21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:03:12 PM
Creation date
1/23/2015 11:51:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BOAPKT 2015 01 21
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Board of Adjustment <br />Meeting Minutes <br />December 17, 2014 <br />Page 5 of 7 <br />Fuller stated there is another modification needed because the property is zoned RM <br />but a portion of the staff report says RL. <br />Robinson apologized for the oversight. <br />Malmquist asked if the existing house required a variance for its placement. <br />Robinson stated that is not correct. He stated that is why the lot width request is stated <br />the way it is. <br />Meseck asked if the lot coverage is in compliance. <br />Robinson stated lot coverage, for Lot A, is in compliance. <br />Malmquist asked how much of a variance is being requested. <br />Robinson stated Lot A is asking for a 2 foot lot width variance, and 18 feet on Lot B. Lot <br />B is also asking for about 1,800 SF of lot area. <br />Meseck asked if there is no way to draw this line without a variance. <br />Robinson stated that is correct. <br />Applicant Presentation and questions from the Board to the applicant: <br />Andy Johnson, representative of the owner, spoke in regards to the project. He stated a <br />4 lot property is unique for Old Town, especially for Lafarge, because most lots towards <br />Main Street are smaller in size. He believes the lots proposed are in keeping with the <br />neighborhood. He added the owner does want to keep the house but the property is too <br />large for her to keep up. <br />No questions were asked of the applican <br />Public Present in Opposition of Application: <br />Peter Stewart, 1132 Jefferson, stated he had concerns because of omissions in the staff <br />report. He also stated he likes the diversity of Old Town and believes lots of the same <br />size lose that diversity. He stated there can be "blight" in sameness. He does not <br />agree with staff on the fact that there aren't too many 100 foot lots. He also doesn't <br />believe there is a threat of a large structure being built because there are several other <br />properties of this size that do not have large structures. He added the RM zone district <br />does permit two principal structures on one parcel. <br />Niska asked what would be gained by this request. <br />Robinson stated this request is to allow for a subdivision of the property and not a <br />development of an additional house. <br />Malmquist stated the' oard is not discussing land speculation, as implied by Stewart. <br />He stated the board is looking at the opportunity for subdivision. <br />Fuller asked Robinson how many multi two unit or 3 unit dwellings there are in town. <br />Robinson stated he did not have that figure at hand, but knows of other structures <br />throughout Old Town that are multi -unit, whether legal or not. <br />Fuller asked how many lots are as narrow as 42. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.