08/27/87 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Commissioner LaDue commented that the location of the house has not been detrimental to the zoning chapter in the past, therefore, he does not believe that the new house will be. . Commissioner Hendriksen commented that his concern was that the zoning chapter currently requires non-conforming uses to be brought into conformance. Mr. Triemert's request seems to be contrary to this. The Commission proceeded to review the findings of fact. Motion by Commissioner Hendriksen and seconded by Commissioner Howell to amend Finding of Fact #17 to read as follows: 17) That if granted, the variance will be inconsistent with the purposes of the zoning chapter. Motion carried. Voting yes: Chairman Zimmerman, Commissioners Hendriksen, Howell, and Shumway. Voting no: Commissioner LaDue. Absent: Commissioner Holm. Commissioner LaDue commented that he felt the finding was redundant. If the variance is granted, it is assuming that the use is inconsistent with the zoning chapter. Motion by Commissioner LaDue and seconded by Commissioner Shumway to adopt Findings of Fact 0177 as amended relating to Mr. Randy Triemert's request for a variance from Sections 170.015F and 170.016A of the City Code regarding setback from thoroughfares. (Please refer to findings of fact file for Findings of Fact 0177.) . Motion carried. Voting yes: Chairman Zimmerman, Commissioners LaDue, Shumway, and Howell. Voting no: Commissioner Hendriksen. Absent: Commissioner Holm. The Commission proceeded to review the proposed variance. Commissioner Hendriksen commented that if the Board approves this variance, it may be difficult for the Board to deny any future requests for variances. The Board discussed the condition of the foundation. Mr. Triemert stated that it is in satisfactory condition and he plans to make some repairs prior to reconstructing the house. Motion by Commissioner Shumway and seconded by Commissioner LaDue to approve Mr. Randy Triemert's request for a variance. Commissioner Shumway commented that the reason for the variance would be that the foundation of the original house is still there; the residential structure was destroyed by fire and that is not Mr. Triemert's fault; Mr. Triemert can't move the structure back on the property due to the location of the on-site system on the property; and there would be too many hardsips created for Mr. Triemert if the Board tries to enforce the provisions of the zoning ordinance. Board of Adjustment/August 27,1987 . Page 3 of 6