4/28/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M M M to improve their lot in life now, whereas they may not have that ability 20 years from now. Chairman Eggert argued that the nonconformity would not be decreased because they will replace a temporary mobile home with a permanent house. Attorney Barkett responded that all the ordinance requires is a reduction in the nonconformity, and Chairman Eggert felt that a partial reduction in nonconformity is not what the ordinance requires if the nonconformity can be completely eliminated. Commissioner Wheeler asked whether the Board could support the applicant's request if there was a finding that this request is a lesser degree of nonconformity and not a policy change or precedent setting decision. County Attorney Charles Vitunac advised that in the future if similar applications come before the Board, the Board must support those applications also, because the argument could be made, for example, that the Board allowed it on 17 cases and now must continue to allow it on the 18th case. He pointed out that staff's position is that the subject request is not a lessening of the nonconformity because a permanent site -built house will replace a temporary mobile home. Chairman Eggert felt it would be hardening the nonconformity. Commissioner Bird thought that if they removed the mobile home that would eliminate a nonconformity, but they cannot be forced to remove the mobile home because it was grandfathered in. He rephrased Attorney Barkett's argument that it is better to build a conventional home and eliminate the mobile home. Attorney Barkett affirmed that, and maintained that any impact on the community from this project would be positive because it preserves the family structure, it allows the family to better itself, it makes the community look better, it makes that neighborhood look better, and it is permissible under the ordinance. He urged the Board to uphold the Planning and Zoning decision to grant this request. Discussion ensued regarding the density allowances and the number of structures on the subject parcel. Director Keating explained that the density allows one house on this lot but in this case the two structures were grandfathered in and they can remain there forever. Chairman Eggert supported staff's position and felt any other decision needed a finding of uniqueness. Commissioner Wheeler felt the Board should think of human beings rather than technicalities. He stated that these structures were placed there legally, and while the ordinance correctly 57 APR 2 8 1992MGK