PC 042303 - Laserfiche WebLink

Inspector, who stated that he saw the shed after doing awalk-through on an addition at 7442 Maywood Drive- Mr_ McIntosh tagged the shed, grid called Darrin Davis., who examined it as well. Mr_ HoF£man stated that he had asked Mr_ Davis whether the inspectors sought out violations, and was told that they did not; Mr_ Davis added that there must have been a complaint- Mr. Hoffman noted that he could not identify a complaint. He noted that the staff report stated that he continued to build; in talking with Mr_ Davis, he had expressed his concerns about the rainy season in November 2002_ He had already installed the plywood on the roof, and wished to put the tarpaper and gutter on so it would not be damaged- Mr. Davis did not seem to have a problem with that, and requested that he go through the process o£ getting the variance. Mr. Hoffman understood the need for rules and laws, and believed that the spirit of those laws was to insure a certain quality of life within the neighborhood- He understood that the projects should be in good taste, and consistent with the homes in the area. He produced a list of 97 homes in his immediate neighborhood within half a mile radius that had similar structures that he said were not code-legal. He noted that these structures were similar to what he had built. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Maas how he could tell they did not conform with Code, Mr_ Hoffman replied that he could tell by looking at them- He noted that the many of the sheds were built to the property line, and that the roof was higher than the fence- He noted that he would be surprised if the owners had received permits for them. He added that the nearby townhomes provided a visual of garage doors, and believed that the shed would not provide a view that was out of the ordinary for the neighborhood. In speaking to the Code Enforcement Of£cer, he was told that he could complain about the list of 97 houses, but he did not wish to do so. He noted that if this appeal were to be denied, he was prepared to appeal the denial to City Council and would submit the list of 97 homes. He also intended to send a letter to each of the 97 addresses, stating the situation, and informing them of their right to appeal to City Council- He was also prepared to send a letter to each City Council member, explaining what had happened. He did not wish to take these steps, but believed that there were many similar structures in the area- He asked the Planning Commission's consideration of this matter. Mr. Hoffman noted that the only part of his yard that was flat was where he wished to build an addition. With respect to emergency access, the back yard of the adjacent property at 5093 Glenwood Court is not a practical area to build within six feet of the property line; thus emergency access to his rear yard could be taken through his neighbor's yard. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Sullivan whether reducing the size of the shed was possible, Mr_ Hoffman replied that the placement of the windows on the side of the house and the PG8cE meter would cut down on the usable space. In PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 23, 2003 Page 3