05/06/1992 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

one lot to create 4 lots. Mr. Miller responded that this ha,d been researched, this lot has been subdivided since 1982, and is not part of another subdivision. He stated that many of the homes on built on 40 foot lots do have problems with the crawl spaces, this house will be built on a slab. The members pointed out that this would be the owner's problem, not the City's, as long as it did not impact on their neighbors. The neighbors ha.d many comments and objections: the bungalows on the street have crawl spaces, not the ranches, all ranch homes ha.ve basements; lot is not abandoned, it has been maintained; since the drainage has not been approved by the Engineering Department, this Board is being misled. Law Director Gareau interrupted to advise that this Board ha.s no authority to deny on the basis of drainage, drainage is the responsibility of the Engineering Department, There are 3 standaxds by which the Board ha.s to judge; whether or not by the size, shape, or topography that there is a hardship that inures to building on this lot because of the size, shape, or topography, not because of economics. The Board must 7Look at the issue of whether or not the person seeking to build would be deprived of substantial property rights if he were denied a vaxiance. Thirdly, whether or not this proposal.is within the spirit and keeping of the Zoning Code. These are the only issues with which this Board must deal. One neighbor asked why this was before this Board when it had not been approved by the Board of Building Code Appeals. Mr. Gomersall stated that the Board of Building Cod.e Appeals is wa.iting for approval from this Board. It was claxified that only two vaxiances are being requested, the 300 square foot variance for axea and the rear yard setback whieh will be 33 feet instead of 50 which is not unusual and no side yard variances are needed. Neighbors stated tha.t he created his own hardship since he bought the lot a year ago, lmowing that he could not build on it. It was pointed out that the original owner paid taxes on it for 40 years before Mr. Miller bought it.. Mr. Gomersall stated tha.t the Board carulot deny a person the right to use his land. He further advised that he travelled the whole street and saw many homes on 40 foot lots. Mr. Miller ha.d presented a list of homes on the street including the sizes of the houses and the size of the lots. The neighbors mainta:in this list is incorrect, but since the members all had actually seen the street, it was decided that the list would not have to be considered. The Building Conmnissioner has a copy of it and is verifying it. The neighbors ma.de other complaints: there is only one other 40 foot lot on the street; the houses at their end of the street have basements, a basementless house will lower their property Values; house could be a fire hazard since it would be too close (again it was stated that no side yard variance was being requested). Mr. Miller stated tha.t .the house.is pre-sold, the owner does not want a basement; a ba.sementless house will not bring down the value of their propexty; and this house will conform to the others in the area. Mr. Gomersall stated that since the drainage problem is going to be taken ca.re of, he could see no logical reason to deny the varianceo He added tha.t the drainage problems are being taken care of through out the Cit3r. J. Maloney moved to grant James A. Miller, S/L 300, Porter Road, located between 5938 and 5918 Porter, the request for a 300 squaxe foot variance for the area of the dwelling, and also a request for a 17 foot rear yard variance, seconded by R. Gomersali. Roll call on motion: Maloney, Gomersall, Grace, and Ferencik, yes. Mr. Purper, no. Motion carried. Variances granted. Neighbors were advised that this proposal would have to be returned to the Board of Btiilding Code Appeals and they would be notified. 3. Thomas Stemmer, 29930 Lorain Road. Request for variance (1123.12). Request 162 square foot variance for garage area to construct attached garage (detached garage existing). Violation of Ord. 90-125, Section 1135.02(c)(3). 2