Laserfiche WebLink
that that would represent a typical sideyard setback to street, one which is sufficient <br />as to not encroach into the vision clearance area. Setbacks are being approved in <br />the neighborhood of 18 feet. We are getting smaller lot sizes arranged between <br />5800 to maximum area of maybe 11 to 12,000 sq. ft. with the median lot size <br />averaging 7400 sq. ft. <br />Paul read the staff recommendations and findings from the staff report. <br />Chairman Sears: It has been moved and seconded that staff recommendations and <br />comments be entered into the record. All in favor. None opposed. Would the <br />applicant like a chance for rebuttal to staff's comments? <br />Von Fsrhen: I think that we have shown that we are meeting the neighborhood <br />characteristics. This is the least possible modification that we have been able to <br />come up with and still make the project work and be viable. As far as the <br />uniqueness of the lot because of the setbacks and because these setbacks are being <br />approved in other neighborhoods, we feel that we are in line with that. The reason <br />they are being approved in other subdivisions is because those lots need some relief <br />to make the house size be compatible with the rest of the neighborhood. Getting <br />back to the use -by -right, that is always a tough statement because a designer, or <br />even yourselves, can visualize different things on this property. What I would like <br />to point out here is that we have a product that will work. It is compatible with the <br />older part of town as well as the new buildings that have been built. It blends very <br />well. It is not bulky. It is attractive to the neighborhood. The use -by -right issue is <br />an issue and we have taken note of that, but the difference in square footage that <br />we are talking about is alot. In fact, the majority of the variance is done to <br />accommodate the visual appearance of the building. It is under contract and that <br />is proof too that it works. As far as the hardship of the unique physical condition, <br />that is the setback problem. <br />Tillquist: You have someone interested in this property who is in need of a ranch - <br />type home? Is that the reason you are building a ranch style house? It looks like <br />you can build a two-story home that is somewhere in the neighborhood of 2000 <br />sq.ft., but perhaps more, and the reason we are seeing a ranch put on here is <br />because you've got a buyer that needs a ranch. The only way you can build a ranch <br />is by dipping into the variance area. Is that why we are seeing this request, or is it <br />just because you can't build a house? <br />Von Eschen: The reason we didn't build on this lot yet is because of the problem <br />with the setbacks that came up originally. If I go back into the cost associated with <br />designing a specific house for that and keeping the costs as low as possible, we can't. <br />We just don't have the capability of doing it. Can it be done? Yes, somebody else <br />could potentially buy this and do it, but I don't think that is what I am presenting <br />here. I feel that the ranch works very strongly. <br />10 <br />