Wheelchair-hardship?
December 11th, 2008 by 
Alica
Brandon’s City Council unanimously overturned a decision made by the city’s Planning & Zoning Commission at their November meeting. On Dec. 1, the council approved the variance request from Chris and Heather Stettnichs, 1604 Keystone Drive, who asked to build a third stall on their existing garage. The Stettnichs say their current garage is too narrow to access their 11-year-old daughter’s wheelchair lift.
Planning & Zoning had determined that a wider garage would stick 12 feet into the setback. The council determined that that is ok.
What do you think? The setbacks are there for a reason. They protect sight lines. They keep easements accessible.
It’s true that it’s more difficult to get a wheelchair into a vehicle in a narrow garage verses a wider one. Could the family have accomplished their objective without having to require special permission from the city?
Did the council make the right decision? Why or why not?
Posted in Uncategorized, City business | 
December 11th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
It’s about time someone in this city has a heart. When somebody actually needs something the council approved it. Hell the planning and zoning can’t figure out how to level lots so they drain what are they good for? 1 good deed done, keep it up !
December 11th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
To #1: Could the family have solved their problem without building out into their setback? One option would have been to park only one car in their existing double garage. That would have left lots of room to get the wheelchair in and out of a vehicle, and it wouldn’t have cost the family anything. Free solution that wouldn’t require special permission.
December 11th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
The person’s in question said it was NOT a necessity which I take as to mean it was not a Hardship request. They stated that it was more of connivance to them. I’m all for giving them more wheelchair room if it’s needed; but the way the family was quoted did not come across that way. Made me feel like they used their child’s disability as a sympathy ploy
December 11th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
even spell check can not catch it all.. connivance is supposed to be ” Convenience “
December 12th, 2008 at 10:55 am
It makes me pleased to see that elected officials doing things for their constituents. It just goes to show that people do have a heart and can look past numbers, figures, graphs and charts. Allowing this harms no one, and benefits a family that’s daily activities are a lot harder then we could even imagine. Some of the small things that we able people take for granted are big hurdles that this family deals with everyday. Thank you City Counsel you mad the right decision.
December 12th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
To #5: I’m not sure it’s accurate to say that the council’s decision doesn’t hurt anybody. I can think at least one scenario where it might.
Their garage addition will stick out 12 feet into their setback. That might obscure sight lines for a motorist, who might then have an accident.
Sometimes it’s hard to determine where the line is between inconvenience and hardship, but it’s the council’s job to be careful about where they draw that line.
The family has the means now to cope with their inconvenience, and they told the council that their request was a matter of convenience.
So will the next request come from someone who uses a walker? Or perhaps from someone who is using a wheelchair temporarily? … I actually have seen the council change an ordinance, in a different situation, to allow someone a temporary fix.
Where do you draw the line?
December 12th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Alica in response to “… I actually have seen the council change an ordinance, in a different situation, to allow someone a temporary fix” we arew seeing this now with the fire pit ordinence. When you ask the question about the set back the house is more than likely in the middle of the block versus the corners. I would not think the city council would allow the third stall to obstruct a corner, but then again….
December 12th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
To #7: I’d like you to drive past the three-stall garage on the northwest corner of Fourth Avenue and Lark Street. If memory serves, that stall was built with a variance.