BOAMin07-15-92Present. t Lombardo, Chairman
ncy McLarnon, Vace Chairman
Dick Skaggs
Sue wilder
Btll Culbertson, au ildtng Offict al
Ajmal Jami, Assistant Ct [y Planner
1. The meeting was calletl to ortler by Mr. Lombardo at 6:30 p.m
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: n Dy M Skaggs, s ondetl by M
McLainon, [hat the minutes of J e 3, 1992 be approved as written
Motion carried by a unanimous roll ca 11.
REQUEST: EXTENSION OF SPECIAL PERMIT FOA SIX MOrvTH PERI00.
ombardo opened the public hea rl ng and presented proof of
publication. asketl if anyone woultl like t speak for o against
[he special permit. There bet ng n who wis hetl t speak Eor o
against the special permit the publiceportlon of the m ing was
closed antl openetl up for discussion by the Boartl memberset
aitl she w netl about what woultl happen with
the Industrial Z ing of test slx m nth e nston duet the fact
[hat at prior meetings Mr. Bender hatl stated he did not want to
Down zone the property to C-3, which enables property owners to
apply t change the voning. He saitl a
woultl be to keep it Industrial Zoning andaiequestya variance
. Jami aid h cetvetl letters from Mr. Bender putting them
once and ethos ity has es pontled. Ne aid the City
obligated t take their proposal to the Commission a will be
up to the City Commission to accept or tleny the pioposalt
entler w as ketl by the e and members if all the improvements
tha [Bw their lase m ing hatl been m nclutling their
chec kin gew Police Department rega rtl ing the parking .impact.
Mr. Sami stag edhthey are in compliance.
else spoke for o against the extension of the special
permltothe public hearing vas clDSetl.
Motion by M tletl by M Skaggs, extend t
s ped al permit for six months~n Motion carrietl by a unanimous loll
call vote.
4. VARIANCE (V-06-92) ER/APPLICANT: MARIE
UTHERLAND; LOCATION: B63-65 E NING: A-2;
AegUEST: R SETBACK FROM A15'~TO 6~6' TO EAECT
ALUMINUM BCAEENED EYORCx FD
ombartlo openetl [he public hearing antl presented proof of
publ ca tl on. a asketl if anyone woultl like to speak for or against
the variance.
Ms. utherla nd s Cetl when she applied for a permt[ she w
of e erything i valved rega rtling the permie process. as She
hiretl m o do the work and w til four days latez
shenwoultl n able to gets then perm.i [n and i the m nttme
therm [ed thebwo[k w ing i She s tetl she
called nM Culbertson antl v toldeshe nwould need to apply for a
wariance in eraer to dear ie ep.
There w s discussion that a ing pool has tlifferen[ se[Dacks
than a d porch. On lots ipla[[ed prior Co 1981. a pool could
De located withing one foot of the property line, however after
. Culbertson spoke i opposition of the v att ng [hat a
permit was submitted to Che Building Department for a scre n porch
Planning and 2 ing Department firs[. He saitl the applicant w
otif red by the Building Official that they could n
permit due to the i setback requirements, ns days
later a top w s posted because theyew cttnq a
fence without a buf ltltng permit, release w srgl wen for the
"Stop Work Ortler" on the fence, however at remainetlaon the screenetl
Mr. Culbertson s tetl his s retary r rchetl property o rs hip
ords t informathe B artleo objection peti ttonsWneEight
signatures o the petition giving [heir approval w e by D
Living o the property, signatures v e by o s living
elsewhere antl eighteen signatures w signetleby t again
tetl t e City Cotles s shoultls be ~s
til the Builtling Official ea pproveso as bu tl tli ng permit." Theawork
was sta rtetl before the City hatl a chance to approve or disapprove.
They have iul es [ abide by and the plans should have been approvetl
by the Planning Department first.
ombartlo asketl M Culbertson if the building w already up
whenLhe put the "Stop Work Order" on it and Mi. Culbertson statetl
that it was.
. Culbertson said M sutherlantl hatl the fence e tetl before
they pulled a permit. s5 he s [etl [he fence material w s delivered
antl they w aheatl and put the fence up because theyaweie afraid
someone woultl steal tt.
Skaggs s artl of Atljas tment tloesn't have the authority
to granx a variance accortling to the steps they have to follow.
ombartlo saitl this self-created hartlship antl Che
applicant shoultl take thts sup w xh her contractor,
n by M Skaggs, s ondetl by Ms. M that the variance
be denietl. Motion cant etl by a unantmousa roll call vote.
The Boartls' reasons for tlenyinq the variance are.
17 The Boa rtl felt is was a self-createtl hartlship.
3) There were vtolations in the building code.
3) The applicant w wllling to live without a back porch, but
she neetletl Lhe back porch i er [o rent the other sitle
of her duplex where she livedortl
4) Should this request be gran[etl, it woultl confer o the
applicant a special privtlege that is deni etl by the zoning
ordinance to other R-2 property owners.
Sutherl antl w atlvised Chat she could appeal to the Ci[y
Commtssion withina[hirty tlayb' iE she vis hed Co.
5. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ITEMS.
No further dts cussion.
otton by Ms. M by Mr. Skaggs, to atljourn. The
meeting atljournetlaae o',25ePOmtletl
Respectfully submittetl,
Martha Tyler, Recording Secre[azy