My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1989-03-07 Minutes
Centerville
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
1989-03-07 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2010 10:46:19 AM
Creation date
1/5/2010 10:46:13 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 /> Page 3 <br /> March 7, 1989 <br /> NEW BUSINESS <br /> Discussion of possible amendment to Ordinance #4, footnote ( + +) <br /> to Table B. <br /> Motion by Drilling, second by Vermeulen, to recommend that the <br /> City Council amend Ordinance #4, deleting the last two sentences <br /> of the footnote to TABLE B, ( + +), motion carried unanimously. <br /> Discussion of variance request for 1567 Peltier Lake Drive. <br /> Mary Jane Lang, 1559 Peltier Lake Drive, was present and stated <br /> that she is a neighbor; she is all for the addition; they will be <br /> improving the property and she has only good things to say about <br /> it. <br /> Member Vermeulen noted that she has nothing against the request <br /> and the plans look great; but, she can't think why this is a <br /> unique situation. <br /> Mr. Scherbel stated that he is puzzled and asked if the P & Z <br /> ever grants variances. He said that none of the neighbors <br /> object, and the addition will extend out somewhere between what <br /> he has now and what is already next door. <br /> Chairperson Tourville read from Section 65.03, reasons for <br /> granting a variance and noted that P & Z has a problem with # -1, <br /> which states that special conditions and circumstances must exist <br /> which make the property unique, or which make this a unique <br /> situation. <br /> Mary Jane Lang said that she feels people on the lake should be <br /> granted variances because of Section 65.03 -1, because of the lake <br /> setback having to be met and because they are taxed so highly on <br /> their property. <br /> Member Vermeulen would like to hear the Building Inspector's <br /> ideas on Section 34.03, which uses averaging, being used to grant <br /> a building permit and maybe refunding Scherbel's fee for a <br /> variance request. <br /> The question of why the property at the corner of Main Street and <br /> Peltier Lake Drive did not need a variance, when it appears to be <br /> much closer to the street, was raised. Assistant Clerk will ask <br /> the Building Inspector. <br /> Mayor Haberman explained the wording in 34.03 which uses a <br /> variation of only six feet being used for averaging and stated <br /> that he feels this is what Gunnar Pettersen, City Building <br /> Inspector, has a problem with. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.