Laserfiche WebLink
for constructing a 38 foot by 40 foot storage garage. Mr. Smith stated <br />that the problem consisted of placing a structure on the rear of the property <br />with no setback and possibly a side setback problem at Conduit Drive, He <br />also stated that traffic should not be a problem since Conduit Drive dead <br />ends at the entry way to the proposed structure. He also advised that the <br />strip of land behind lot #20 which was a portion of this easement was not a <br />part of the subdivision and that the structure currently on this .06 acre <br />tract would be used as a part of the improvement. Chairman Tucker then <br />opened up the meeting to the floor, David Rihm, the treasurer of the Marley- <br />woods Homeowner's Association stated that the structure violated subdivision <br />covenants and also stated that there is an architectural committee which must <br />approve this. Mr. Rihm requested that the board table this until the Marley- <br />woods Homeowner's Association had had an opportunity to meet with the <br />petitioners. The board's attorney advised that this board would not be <br />governed by any decision made by the Homeowner's Association since these <br />covenants ran with the property and were not governed by the Town Plan <br />Commission or Board of Zoning Appeals. Henry Griffith of 438 Tulip Drive <br />then requested an explanation of the specific variance. Phil Smith showed <br />a drawing and explained exactly what they were doing. The board's attorney <br />advised that the request consisted of elimination of the 40 foot rear setback <br />requirement and the side setback standard would be met if the structure was <br />to be constructed as shown on the drawings. Mr. Giffith then advised that <br />he was against the proposed variance. Charles Vaughn, owner of lot #18, <br />stated that he lived directly across from the area where the construction <br />would be taking place. He stated that currently there are six vehicles <br />parked along the property and on the street which created an eyesore. He <br />felt that Mr. Lowery could park the vehicles and recreational vehicles some <br />other place. He felt the property was not maintained properly and that <br /> <br />-3- <br /> <br /> <br />