Laserfiche WebLink
Area Board of Zoning Appeals -April 7, 2010 <br />that has cleaned up the neighborhood. Resolved a lot of the Code Enforcement problems that have been <br />going on in this area for quite some time. I know that the staff is not real fond of, according to their <br />recommendation that they have, but the duplex is the use that has been there well over 60 years. The home <br />has been. there as well and I don't have any proof but T figured tlzexe probably waa a house an that vacant <br />parcel at one time, but I can't find anything because it predates anything that I have record wise for that site. <br />We're looking to reconfigure the three parcels in a manner tha# basically adds a value to the area for the <br />owner as well as a new home being built in the area. i know there are several new homes built in the area <br />already over the last five years or more so it's not like we're going to be hurting anything with regards to <br />that, harmful to the neighborhood. Anew home does add value to the area mare so than a vacant lot. The <br />owner has also extended new utilities into the home sites there at great expense to him also, sa it's not we're <br />going to be doing this and we're going to be gone in two years. There's an investment here that, like T say is <br />close to a half million dollars that we would like to go to the Council with favorable xecommendation. With <br />what you can already see what we've done to the area and what we're proposing to do with the third parcel. <br />If you have any questions I'd be more than happy to answer those. If there's something that would be more <br />than before I got involved, Mr. Matthews is here and he can help with some of those questions also he'll be <br />speaking in favor of the petition also. <br />MR. FEDDER: Is this going to be a rental type property or is he going to live in there? <br />MR. LANG: He does not live on site. l~Ie lives in Granger. So it will probably be a rental. <br />MR. FEDDER: Because I'm always concerned, we're always finding ourselves fighting whether or not <br />you're in compliance with vne student, two students, three students, four students, to one unit, so... <br />MR. LANG: That'll be a question that you can ask Mr. Matthews when he comes up. <br />MR. URBANSKI: Yes, Christa. <br />MS. CHRISTA NAYDER: I just want to reiterate ow- comments. Currently the duplex is anon-conforming <br />use and the fact that the lots are being reconfigured is what's causing it to lose the non-conforming use <br />because the lot is changing it's configuration so that's why we need to ask for the Special E~cception. The <br />Special Exception is then going to make it a permanent use and T think that is what we are kind of against. <br />We're hoping that this is going to turn back into something that is single family since that's what the <br />Northeast Neighborhood Development and Area Plan has identified this area to be. I don't think we have a <br />problem necessarily with the variances for anything that's existing. You know the house is too close to the <br />lot line, they are existing and we understanding that but all three lots need size variances, probably means <br />that there is not enough room there far three separate lots. I also have addition comments from the City <br />Engineers Department. This was in response to the subdivision that may be relative here, it says "no <br />engineering feasibility report has been submitted". Terry said something about the utilities being extended, <br />so I think that's been covered. It's says lot 3 must be served by an improved street, alley must be paved from <br />St. Peter to west side of lot 3 and they also asked if a variance is being sought for any off street parking`? <br />And that conformance with the above comments plus what was requested at the BZA and they t•ecommend <br />approval for the subdivision subject to all of those things. <br />68 <br />