1962 MINUTES - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

THIRTY FOURTH MEETING - VILLAGE OF GEM LAKE COUNCIL JUNE 19th 1962 - HOFFYA NS CORNERS HALL 1. THE MATOR CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 8:36 FM 2. The CLERK CALLED THE ROLL - PRESENT - HOFFN,AN, HANSEN, ARCAND, GRAY, MORGAN & D.HOFFMAN. ABSENT - NONE. Also present - J. Bemis,Don Opstad, E. Bigelow and Mr. Dale of Midwest Planning and Research. 3. MOVED BY HANSEN AND SECONDED DY GRAY THAT THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING HELD MAY 15th 1962 BE DISPENSED WITH. ALL AYES. #. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR - NONE 5. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES - a. Bemis asked Mr. Dale to proceed with his report. Dale stated that the council and planning committee had now received "Planning report #1 - Analysis of existing Development of Gem Lake Village", that comments had been received on this report and that he was now submitting report #2, called "A Comprehensive guide Plan for the Village of Gem. Lake - Dratf Copy". With this report he also submitted the following maps: - LAND USE PLAN OUTLINE OF ZONING TEXT CIRCULATION STUDY Dale stated that after the council and the planning committee had studied the Guide Plan and the Maps, and made any comments or changes, the Guide Plan would then be put into final forth and would be accompanied with report #3 "Subdivison Regulations" and #4 "Zoning Ordinance", and that these items are those which make the Plan effective. General discussion followed with respect to the Land Use Map.Dale pointed out that in some areas the larger lot sizes were running from 21 to 5 acres, but they felt that the choice of 3 acres for our larger lots was in keeping with the atmosphere we wish to keep in Gem Lake and that if at a later date there became a demand to split these lots, they could be split to 12 acres, but provision should be made that houses should be so placedon the 3 acre lots so that splitting could be possible. There was considerable discussion of the 21,000 foot lots, in the south west corner, and it was decided that as our present limit was 20,060 sq.ft., this did not make much of a change and that 24,000 feet was a good size. At the same time it was pointed out that the Minimum Floor areas per dwellingunit ? been increased to:- 3 acres - 19800 sq. ft 1 acre - 1,500 ' " It 36,000 sq. ft" if. 1,200 200 sq, ft, lift As far as the commercial zoning suggestions were concerned, the group seemed to feel that these were about right, and fitt3d with existing conditions. Dale also showed skeatches in connection with the "Outline of Zoning Text" to explain "Lot frontage", "Front yard set backs", "Side yard set backs", "Rear ,yard set backs", and "Permitted uses",