My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC 08-08-1977
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1977
>
CC 08-08-1977
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:11:56 PM
Creation date
11/9/2006 3:46:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Minutes of Regular Council Meeting <br />Page th ree <br /> <br />August 8, 1977 <br /> <br />REPORT OF ViLLAGE PLANNER ORLYN MILLER <br /> <br />Case No. 77-37. Front Setback Variance for House Addition - 3244 <br />Sandeen Road. <br />Miller referred Council to his report (7/28/77), and to reports of the <br />Board of Appeals (8/1/77) and Planning Commission (8/2/77). both reco~- <br />mending Council's approval of the 5' front setback variance. Miller <br />noted that the affected property owners, on either side and across <br />the street from the SUbJect property, have signed a statement that they <br />have no obJections to the proposed addition. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />After discussion. Wingert moved, seconded by Woodburn, that Council <br />approves the 5' front setback variance for the house addition at 3244 <br />Sandeen Road because of the hardships of the land features of the lot. <br />narrowness, grade, etc. Motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />Case No. 77-39. Side and Rear Setback Variances for Garage - 1892 <br />Lake Lane <br />Miller referred Council to his report (7/28/77), and attached sketches <br />of the site; noted that the rear setback variance Is appropriate be- <br />cause of the shallow lot (81' deep); requested side setback variance <br />Is based on need for maneuvering space because of location of a large <br />pine tree, and for aesthetic reasons (contrasting exterior treatment, <br />screening of motor home from view by parking it between the two <br />garages) . <br /> <br />Miller noted that the Board of Appeals 18/1/77) recommends approval of <br />both the side and rear 5' setback variances; neighbors to the east <br />and south have signed a statement that they have no objections to the <br />proposed garage location; Planning Commission recommends approval of <br />both variances with the condition that one curb cut Is closed and land- <br />scaped. <br /> <br />Wingert moved, seconded by Woodburn, thaT Council approve the 5' rear <br />setback variance, based on the minimal depth of the lot, on the con- <br />dition that the westerly of two curb cuts Is closed. <br /> <br />After discussion. motion did not carry (Wingert voting in favor of the <br />motion; Hanson, Crepeau, Crichton voting In opposition; Woodburn abstain- <br />Ing) . <br /> <br />Crichton moved that Council approve the 5' rear and 5' sldeyard setback <br />variances, as recommended by the Planning Commission, with the condi- <br />tion that one curb cut Is closed. Motion was seconded by Hanson, and <br />carried (Crichton, Hanson, Crepeau voting In favor of the motion; <br />Wingert voting in opposition; Woodburn abstalnlngl. <br /> <br />Case No. 77-33, Special Use Perm!t for Planned Unit Development for <br />Twin Clty.Christian Homes Retirement Center. <br />Miller referred Council to his report (j/28/77~ to Minutes of the Plan- <br />ning Commission Meeting of 8/2/77 and to the plans submitted In support <br />of the Special Use Permit application. - <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Miller reviewed the current proposal as it compares to the Initial <br />proposal; noted that the City Council's decision to grant a Special Use <br />Permit on August 25, 1975 established that the proposed Retirement Cen- <br />ter is an officially acceptable use of the subJect site. <br /> <br />Architect Wayne Winsor (Winsor/Farley) presented sitellne drawings, In- <br />dicating the views of the apartment building from the various residential <br />areas to the east, west and south. <br /> <br />Council compared the site pl~ns of the Initial and current plans and <br />noted that additional plans will be required for review and approval <br />(grading, building elevations, utility etcJ prior to approval of the <br />first phase of construction. Wingert noted that the 4-plex units are <br />not actually depleted on the site plan; only a concept location; there- <br />fore. they were not part of the Public Hearing. <br />. <br /> <br />Winsor noted that the site plan has been amended since the Planning <br />Commission meeting of 8-2-77, to comply with the Commission's recom- <br />mendations (copy of revised site plan to be submitted for the Village <br />record) . > <br /> <br />-3- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.