CC MIN 1978 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

209 he comnenced work on the structure, such is not the case. Mr. Martinez claimed that he had asked for his file in the Building . Department but it was hidden from him � �, In response to question from City Manager Fales, Mr. Martinez said � that Building Department employees told him on two occasions they ' could not ftnd a file on him, but he believes they were deliberately ' refusing to show �t to him. He said he wished to determine who had lodged the complaint regarding his structure wh�ch was constructed without the proper permit In response to question from City Attorney Schricker regarding Mr. Martinez' allegations that he was denied access to files, Mr. Martinez acknowledged that when he asked for his files he had not yet filed an application for a building permit. Mr. Schricker pointed out that it would appear that no file would have existed �f no application had been made by Mr. Martinez. Mr. Martinez then advised that he received a letter from Mr. Leith of the Building Department regarding his illegal structure and was later advised of an informal call which prompted investigation by that Department. He stated that after receiving the letter he did apply for a building permit In response to question as to the basis for the statement made in Mr. Martinez' letter of appeal that he believes the structure to be legal, Mr. Martinez said he was attempting to improve his prop- erty. Mr. Hume suggested that Mr. Martinez' belief rests on his view of the neighborhood where similar structures have been built, stating a list could be prepared of similar neighborhood structures. In response to question, Planning Director Schroeter advised that ' there may be similar structures in the nelghborhood but they are not constructed within one foot of the front lot line as is that of Mr. Martinez. Mr. Schroeter explained that at the time the homes in the area were constructed, the required setbacks were 20 , feet from the front lot line and 10 feet on side lots ad�acent to streets, but about five years ago a change took place making both required setbacks 15 feet. Mr. Schroeter observed that because of the original 10 foot sideyard setback, there are structures in the neighborhood only ten feet from the sideyard lot line rather than 15 feet as is presently required. Such structures represent a legal, nonconform�ng use now. In response to question as to whether as an ironworker he was not aware of the fact that permanent structures such as his might re- quire a building permit, Mr. Martinez said that he is a manufacturer but does not install ironwork. Comment was made concerning whether it would not be inconsistent of the Planning Commission to allow a one-foot setback at this time and�whether it could be suggested the intended use of the structure might be for a carport. Mayor Barrett invited anyone else present who wished to speak to , do so. No one wished to speak. ' MOTION: Councilman Norris, seconded by Councilman Chandler, to close the public hearing. -3- Reg.Mtg. 5/15/78 ; � �. � - � ' �