02/04/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

side, setbacks, what ever and each time we tell you we don't want to see you coming back for the same things. Here you are again returning Mr. Gomersall suggested Latina & Latina just doesn't care about following the rules and regulations of the code or they are trying to squeeze to much home onto these lots. He furtller reviewed that the houses are to big for the lots, which has been indicated to you before by this board, and now your getting into all sorts of problems. Mr. Balsamo indicated the home on lot 32 is not one of their models that were designed for these lots, it was a custom home and we had to move the house back 6'feet in order to make it fit on the lot. The engineer moved the house on sub lot 32 too the left so the driveway would not be so severe. Therefore sub lot 33 were the variance is needed doesn't have enough room, so we are asking for the additional 2'foot variance. Mr. Balsamo suggested the board was penalizing the buyers of sub lot 33, because sub lot 32 was built first. Mr. Gomersall suggested he understood the developer has a problem, but it is their problem, and the Commission is not here to tell you how to solve it. Mr. Balsamo again reviewed because the home on lot 32 was moved the'proposed home on lot 33 would need a variance, and reviewed the plans with the Chairman and Building Commissioner Conway. Mr. Conway indicated he understood that the home on lot 32 was moved to accommodate a sti-aighter driveway, but it didn't have to be moved and therefore sub lot 32 is not germane to the variance being requested for sub lot 33. Mr. Gomersall suggested he agreed with Mr. Conway and indicated they needed to come up with another solution for the house that they are about to build. It is not acceptable to have the house on lot 33 so close to the house on lot 32. Mr. Konold asked how close the house on sub lot 33 would be to the house on lot 32. Mr. Balsamo indicated it would be 13'feet opposed to the required 15'feet. The house being built on lot 33 is a model home desigved to fit on any lot and now if the variance is not granted none of the houses designed for these lots can be built on lot 33, which were all approved by Council and this Commission. Mr. Gomersall indicated, neiflier Council nor Planning Commission told you to build in the wrong spot. Mss. Latina suggested she took offezlse to the comments that they have jammed the homes in place. She believes her company has done a fine job in the community, as fare as delivering a product to the buyers with sensitivity of how they are being placed. Mss Latina believes they took into cousideration die home owner of sub lot 32 when they moved the home, it was not a mistake, it was trying to give the home owner the benefit of not having the severity in the driveway. The severity was a problem on sub lot 30 and they moved that home for the owner as well. It is because the way the cold-a-sac is set up, it is narrow in the front and wide in the back. This home is taking the effect of what has been placed along the way, this is a standard model. Are they expected to put a home of lesser value in, which would be less then any other home in the cold-a-sac. They would not have come here if they didn't have a problem. Mr. Gomersall indicated Latina & Latina have been before - the Plamiing Commission four other times, which created this problem. There comes a time when you have to say enough is enough. Mss. Latina suggested they wanted things to work out for the owners of the homes so they could be good neighbors. Mr. Wright from sub lot 32 suggested he had been looking the problem over. He had not met the new neighbors nor were they ever made aware of the problem until December 4, 1998, which at that time he requested Mss. Latuia take him to the site. Mss. Latina told them she could not do that. Mr. Wright suggested he and his wife went to the site on their own and after looking it over decided they prefer the home on lot 33 not be that close. The house that they are moving from measured 22'feet between homes, and they are upgrading to a newer more expensive home. Now they find out the developer wants to place the homes closer, and they had to pay extra as the lot is a premium lot. Mr. Wright would like to offer a solution to the problem. He indicated he had a meeting with Mr. Latina, and Mss. Latina last night and asked them who's fault it was that the homes were so close together, Mss. Latina indicated it was their engineers fault. Mr. Wright indicated the lot he purchased is a premium lot and expected it to comply with the codes of the City. His solution is to move the home 2'feet to the east or build a home that fits on the lot. Mr. Gomersall asked what response was given to him regarding his question of moving 2'feet to the east or building a home that fits the lot at last nights meetulg, as it was never brougllt up at touight's meeting, and it is up to the owner of the lot to bring it up. Mr. Gomersall suggested the new solution would also require a variance. Mrs. Wright indicated she would not be happy unless the home was moved 2'feet to the east. Mr. Latina suggested that was another subdivision. Mr. Hillman suggested having a variance on lot 33 would set a precedence for other homes being built. Councilman Michael Gareau Jr. indicated when he saw the current case on the agenda for tonight's meeting, he reviewed the muiutes of prior meetings in which Latina & Latina had requested 9