2-PCMinutes-20111128 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City of Hastings 3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ0LQXWHV±1RYHPEer 28, 2011 Page 2 of 4 Commissioner Bullington asked for clarification that the building code requires a three foot separation between buildings as opposed to the Zoning Code requirement of six feet; does one supersede the other? Director Hinzman stated the Commissioner was correct and that the Building Code generally supersedes the Zoning Code, however the Zoning Code can be more restrictive as in this case. Commissioner Bullington asked the applicant what the purpose of the garage was for and whether a garage has ever been on the property. Mr. Swanlund responded the garage was for his personal property and he was not aware of a garage on the property in the past. Commissioner Bullington stated he was not comfortable with varying the zoning provisions for a secondary structure, citing aesthetics and character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Estenson stated the placement of the building was not done by the applicant and the variance does appear to be grossly outside of the zoning requirements. Mr. Swanlund asked for clarification the building height limit. Director Hinzman stated the accessory building height was limited to 16 feet. Motion by Messina to recommend approval of the Original Hastings Design Standards review with the following conditions. Second by Estenson. Upon vote taken, Ayes 6, Nays 0. Motion carried. 1)Conformance with the Planning Commission Staff Report and plans dated November th 28 2011. 2)Approval of a building permit. 3)Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void. Discussion continued on the Variance request. Commissioner Vaughan asked about any greenspace requirements. Director Hinzman stated that there is a 35 percent greenspace requirement in the rear yard. Commissioner Vaughan asked for clarification on how the rear yard was determined on this structure. Director Hinzman stated the area south of the house was determined to be the rear yard. Discussion continued as to whether the east side should be considered the rear. The east side of the home is opposite of Tyler Street where the home is addressed and a door is located. Director Hinzman stated that doors exist on both the north and west side of the property, making the rear yard determination up for interpretation. Vice Chair Stevens asked for clarification on where the rear yard begins. Director Hinzman stated all property located behind the house; if the east side of the property where the garage is proposed to be located is considered the rear, the garage likely exceeds the 35% green space requirement. The Commission may want to consider that in the variance.