Laserfiche WebLink
the City and the City staff are being arbitrary and unreasonable and felt their position is more <br />about form rather than substance of the matter. He is willing to challenge the City's position <br />in Superior Court. Mr. Raber felt refusing to process his application for a variance in <br />accordance with Municipal Code 18.132 places the City on questionable legal grounds. He <br />asked the Council to grant his appeal. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis asked for clarification about another property in Deer Oaks where a building <br />was built outside the building envelope. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated there is one house that is not constructed within the area that was <br />originally designated in the building envelope and has also been graded much differently than <br />originally shown in the original plans for the tract. This happened because of an earthquake <br />fault setback imposed when an earthquake fault was found that wasn't known about on that lot <br />when the original PIJD was approve, d; also the regrading was a function of subsequent geologic <br />studies. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr talked about the dotted line which purports to be the property line. She asked <br />if there were a lot split, what size would the lots be? <br /> <br /> Mr. Raber's stated that his lot is 2 1/2 acres and if the lot were split, each lot would be <br />approximately one acre. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush stated that the variance procedure applies where there is residential property <br />that is zoned in a category other than a PUD district. A PUD zoning district has unique <br />qualities and certain development standards apply there. Therefore in order to do something <br />different, a PUD modification is required, rather than a variance. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked if there were any comments from the neighbors. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated the homeowners association has been opposed to Mr. Raber's <br />attempts to split the lot or build outside the building envelope. The minor modification <br />procedure is only available under the Council's policies when the neighbors also support the <br />application. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis talked about the communication which stated all of the things Mr. Raber <br />would have to do for major modification process. She asked if this entitled him to the <br />modification or he just has to do the studies to have the application considered? <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift stated the studies would need to be done; the Council would decide if the <br />modification was in order. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr asked, if the application for a second unit were approved, and the neighbors <br />agreed, could the second unit be converted to an independent lot? <br /> <br />05/16/95 <br /> -10- <br /> <br /> <br />