Board of Adjustment Documents 1992

Home Browse Search

additional 1 foot, so it would be 16.39. The only other comment I would make is that it seems like City Council has addressed these two lots already. They made it pretty clear that they would grant a reduction of the front setback from 25 feet down to 20 feet. By not being explicit when the application was really explicit, it sounded like Jefferson Street should also have a reduction of the setback from 25 feet down to 20 feet. City Council was pretty clear in not granting that and they left it at 25 feet. It seems like we are wandering over old ground that has been covered before. Probably alot of deliberation went into it back then too. I would entertain a motion, unless there is more discussion. Tillquist: Does this prevent him from coming back again and asking for another variance? Sears: No...I do recall there were two houses built farther north on Hutchinson where we did grant a twenty (20) foot setback in lieu of the twenty-five (25) foot front yard setback. Pendergrast: The way DRCROG said to do it was to make a motion in the affirmative. I make a motion that the variance be granted, a variance of an 8 foot sideyard setback to allow a 17 foot street setback. Is that clear? Sears: Yes. Do we have a second? We have a motion on the floor to grant a variance for an 8 foot variance on the sideyard setback bringing it to a 17 foot setback from a 25 foot. Is there a second? Ross: Second. Sears: There is a motion and a second. Can we have a roll call? Roll Call Vote: Neil Tillquist - No Robert Ross - Yes Steve Pendergrast - No Ray Sears - No Sears: The motion has been denied, and, therefore, the variance has been denied. I guess I would advise the applicant to possibly work on a modification here and see if you can get your client to work within the parameters. I think we have really looked at it hard, but there must be a way. Recess for five minutes. Meeting Called Back to Order and the Chairman Opened the Public Hearing. Next item on the agenda: 12