Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Bookmark and Share
File #: RES 20-105    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Resolution Status: Passed
In control: City Council
Final action: 1/15/2020
Title: Memorializing the City Council’s decision to deny the appeal by Daniel Carlson and Barbara Pilling from a decision of the BZA to approve height and lot-coverage variances in order to construct a new garage at 1780 Goodrich.
Sponsors: Amy Brendmoen
Title
Memorializing the City Council’s decision to deny the appeal by Daniel Carlson and Barbara Pilling from a decision of the BZA to approve height and lot-coverage variances in order to construct a new garage at 1780 Goodrich.

Body
WHEREAS, on September 5, 2019, Dan Bustos (“Applicant”), applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals (“BZA”) under BZA File No. 19-0081671 for variances from the strict application of certain requirements of the Zoning Code pertaining to accessory structures for the purpose of constructing a two-story, three-stall garage, on the applicant’s R3 zoned property which is commonly known as 1780 Goodrich Avenue and legally described as Macalester Park E 61 5/10 Ft of Lot W BLK 11, [PIN No. 042823430014]; and

WHEREAS, the Applicant requested two variances. The first request was for a 1 ft. 4 in. height variance calculated as follows: Leg. Code § 63.501(e) limits the height of accessory structures to 15 ft. Applicant’s proposed garage would be 16 ft. 4 in. which required a variance of 1 ft. 4. The second request was for a 240-sq. ft. lot-coverage variance calculated as follows: Leg. Code § 63.501(f) limits accessory structure lot coverage to 1000 sq. ft. Presently located on Applicant’s property is a 120-sq. ft. shed which Applicant intends to keep. Applicant’s proposed garage would be 1,240 sq. ft. The combined lot coverage for these accessory structures would cover 1,240 sq. ft. which required a variance of 240 sq. ft.; and

WHEREAS, on October 7, 2019, the BZA, pursuant to Leg. Code § 61.601, duly conducted a public hearing on Applicant’s requested variances where all people interested were afforded an opportunity to be heard; and

WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the said public hearing, and based upon all the files and testimony offered at the hearing offered for or against the Applicant’s variance requests, including the report of BZA staff dated September 30, 2019 which had recommended denial of the Applicant’s variance requests, the...

Click here for full text
Date NameDistrictOpinionCommentAction
No records to display.