My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1989-07-05 Minutes
Centerville
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
1989-07-05 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2010 10:38:06 AM
Creation date
1/5/2010 10:38:04 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
P & Z Meeting Minutes <br /> July 5, 1989 <br /> Page Four <br /> motion carried unanimously. <br /> Discussion on the variance request to add oI2 to existing building <br /> devoted as a non- conforming use, using exterior wall surface of <br /> sheet metal at 6867 - 20th Avenue South. <br /> Liaison Haberman noted that the building was then= prier to the <br /> ordinance, therefore was grandfathered in. He also noted that <br /> Ordinance #44 -A, Section. 3.3 allowed expansion of a pole _ern if <br /> expansion were not more than 50% of the gross area of the pole <br /> barn as of the date of passage of this Ordinance. <br /> Vice - Chairperson Welk requested clarification of the term <br /> " architectural metal panel" for future reference <br /> and for the Ilf"S`t <br /> City Council meeting. <br /> Motion by Vermeulen, second by Lindgren to recommend to the City <br /> Council that a variance to Ordinance 44 be granted to Reubin Line <br /> for the property at 6847 - 20th Avenue South in order to add on <br /> to their existing building, a structure devoted as a non - <br /> conforming use for the following reasons: <br /> -- Special conditions and circumstances exist which are <br /> peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved, as <br /> • <br /> this building and business were in existence prior to the <br /> ordinance, and do not result from the actions of the <br /> petitioner; <br /> - Literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance <br /> would deprive the petitioner of rights commonly enjoyed by <br /> other properties in the same district under the terms of <br /> this ordinance, as they would not be able to expand their <br /> business as needed, but have the land necessary to do so and <br /> a business that existed pr ,•c the ordinance; <br /> - Granting the variance requested will not confer on the <br /> applicant any special privilege that is denied by this <br /> ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the <br /> same district, as structures and businesses existing prior <br /> to the ordinance are grandfathered in; <br /> - The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply <br /> of light and air to adjacent property, or unreasonably <br /> diminish or impair established property values within the <br /> surrounding area, or in any other respect impair the public <br /> health, safety, or welfare of the residents of the city; <br /> and contingent upon the following: <br /> - Submission of architectural certification stamp on <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.