Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission approves two setback variances for 308 Eustace Ave
Summary
The Goodland Planning Commission voted to grant two variances for Trevor and Sarah Linton at 308 Eustace Ave, allowing a 4-foot rear-yard setback and a zero-foot side-yard setback to permit construction on an existing pad. Commissioners noted the pad predates current setbacks and found hardship and no material harm to neighbors.
The Goodland Planning Commission on Monday approved two variance requests for 308 Eustace Ave, allowing the property owner to build on an existing concrete pad that does not meet current setback rules.
Zach (city planning staff) told commissioners the property’s pad and footers were poured before the current R2 setbacks were adopted and recommended the board find the situation unique and that granting the variances would not harm public health or adjacent property owners. Trevor Linton told the commission he plans a 20-by-30 enclosed outdoor living space for family use, with minimal plumbing and a single bathroom; he said the structure would match the house’s exterior materials.
Commissioners discussed whether the lot’s corner location, larger original lot sizes in that neighborhood and an existing fence offset supported uniqueness and hardship findings. Zach noted possible sight-triangle concerns in the alley but said alleyways are used for utilities rather than public roadways and the fence currently sits off the property line, reducing impacts.
Commissioner Grady Bonsel moved and Commissioner Dennis Neita seconded approval of the rear-yard variance (reduction to 4 feet); the motion carried, with one commissioner recorded opposed. Commissioner Curtis Penrod moved and Grady Bonsel seconded approval of the side-yard variance (side setback to 0 feet); that motion also carried, with one opposed.
The commission’s approvals allow the applicants to use the existing pad subject to compliance with all other R2 zoning and building-code requirements and any standard permitting conditions. No individual vote-by-name was announced in the record; the board’s roll call earlier in the meeting showed five members present.
