Laserfiche WebLink
two-story. The overall bulk of the house is greatly reduced by having a ranch on <br />here (smaller coverage than the code allows). It is only covering 26% of the lot vs. <br />the 30% that is allowed. <br />Sears: Then again, with the envelope created by the setbacks, you couldn't have <br />30% coverage anyway. <br />Von Eschen: Then it would be closer to 22%. This is the only lot in subdivision <br />that has a hardship on it. It will have the smallest house in subdivision. We have <br />scaled it down as much as possible. <br />Pendergrast: Is there a floor plan of house to look at? <br />Sears: Let's move on to Board disclosure. I have viewed the site, had no contact <br />with applicant, and no discussions regarding this application. <br />Robert Ross: I went by the site. No contact or discussions. <br />Pendergrast: I went by site. No prior contact or discussions. <br />Tillquist: I have seen the site. What kind of house was originally designed for this <br />kind of lot? <br />Von Eschen: We had a plat when we purchased the property that apparently was <br />incorrect. It showed setbacks that were much narrower than this. In a way, we <br />bought a lot that we thought we could build a house on and it turns out that when <br />we came in to check on this lot, we made a mistake. Originally, it was 25 and 25, <br />but then when I brought the paperwork out and we found that the 20 foot setback <br />had been granted to the PUD. <br />Sears: Any people in the audience who are speaking opposed to the variance? <br />Campbell: What was the date the PUD was approved? <br />Wood: August 5, 1986 was the original approval date. <br />Campbell: Did you own the lot at that time? <br />Von Eschen: No. We bought it in August, 1991. <br />Campbell: And it is a vacant lot now? <br />Von Eschen: Correct. <br />3 <br />