CCMIN101888 - Laserfiche WebLink

261 location in his yard he can place the shed; it is six feet to his neighbor and there are no windows on either side. He stated the structure would be painted the same color as his house and he will put up two feet of lattice on the fence to further reduce the visible impact of the structure. He stated there are other structures similar to his in the neighborhood who did not get permits; the City received an anonymous phone call regarding his and that is why he is here tonight. He felt he should be allowed to have his shed if others in the neighborhood are allowed to keep theirs. Mr. & Mrs. Brown, 6827 Corte de Flores, who live directly across the street from Mr. Bohn, stated they have no problem with the structure. They did not feel one anonymous phone call should be legitimate; a petition shows all residents on the street are in favor of allowing the structure to remain. Mr. Jack Keane, 6832 Corte de Flores, stated the building causes no problem whatsoever. Mr. Vincent Negi, 6820 Corte de Flores, stated that Mr. Bohn showed him the plans as the structure was being erected. He felt Mr. Bohn should be allowed to have the shed in his yard. No one in the audience spoke in opposition to the appeal. There being no further testimony, Mayor Mercer declared the public hearing closed on this item. Councilmember Brandes stated he normally does not approve variances because it sets a dangerous precedent, however, this neighbor has been considerate of the other neighbors and built an attractive structure. Mayor Mercer stated that Council approved the smaller lots in this subdivision; these property owners have the right to amenities as other property owners. He felt the structure is tastefully done and should be accepted. Councilmember Butler stated he drove by and looked at the building and agrees that visibly it is not a problem, but he could not approve the variance because there is no justification or findings to allow it. Councilmember Wilson stated the structure was built without a permit, staff feels it poses a fire hazard to Mr. Bohn's residence and to the house next door, and it could have been placed at another location in his yard. He stated he could not support the appeal because it does not comply with the sideyard ordinance. It was moved by Councilmember Brandes, and seconded by Mayor Mercer, to approve AP-88-21, appeal of a decision of the Board of Adjustment denying Case V-88-19, the application of Raymond Bohn for a variance from the Municipal Code to allow retention of an - 12 - 10-18-88