Laserfiche WebLink
358 <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift replied that he did not know the exact square <br /> footage of those units but that none were granted variances. He <br /> added that the sizes of some of the bigger lots are deceiving <br /> because they have very large sloping banks, which make the size of <br /> the actual building pad area comparable to Mr. Peel's lot. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr inquired how far back the unit could be moved and <br /> still maintain the minimum rear yard setback. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift replied that the unit can be moved all the way back <br /> to the slopebank without reaching the 30-foot rear yard minimum <br /> setback. He explained that the reason Mr. Peel is requesting a <br /> front yard variance is to retain as much usable back yard as <br /> possible. <br /> <br /> Ms. Scribner commented that she finds the house too big for <br /> the lot and that she cannot make the findings that would support <br /> the variance. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr stated that one of the concerns usually considered in <br /> cases like this is public reaction, which does not appear to be an <br /> issue here. She pointed out that while the proposed house is <br /> attractive and typical of the area, it appears to have a great deal <br /> of mass on the front. She indicated that she would be able to make <br /> the necessary findings if the house were moved back by another five <br /> feet, even if it resulted in minimizing the back yard to some <br /> extent, to reduce the impact on the streetscape. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer stated that if the house were moved back as <br /> proposed by Ms. Mohr, it would come closer to the Barnes' house. <br /> He indicated that he could make all three findings to grant a <br /> variance. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr commented that she has some reservations about the <br /> extra five feet but that it does not warrant denying the project. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Mercer, and seconded by Ms. Mohr, that <br /> Resolution No. 91-124 be adopted, approving AP-91-3, the appeal of <br /> Michael Peel and Darlene Crane of the Planning Commission denial of <br /> V-91-9, thereby granting a variance from the Municipal Code to <br /> allow the construction of a new home that would encroach within the <br /> required front and side yard setbacks of the property located at <br /> 952 Gray Fox Circle (Tract 5188, Lot 12). <br /> The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers Mohr and Mayor Mercer <br /> NOES: Councilmember Scribner <br /> ABSENT: Councilmembers Butler and Tarver <br /> ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> - 10 - <br /> 8-6-91 <br /> <br /> <br />