Laserfiche WebLink
Regular Planning CommissionMeeting <br />Minutes –Wednesday, March 2, 2016 <br />Page 35 <br />Member Stellmach admitted he continued to be hung up on the easement and placement <br />1723 <br />of the fence on the northern edge of the property, and where it should be placed, whether <br />1724 <br />on the property border or if that would require the property owner to violate the terms of <br />1725 <br />the easement.Member Stellmach stated that he wasn’t sure he could recommend that <br />1726 <br />they do so without having sufficient facts before him. <br />1727 <br />Member Murphy stated that his limited reasoning led him to believe that the Commission <br />1728 <br />was making a recommendation to the City Council.Further, Member Murphy noted that <br />1729 <br />the City Council and in their role as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals had <br />1730 <br />thoroughly debated this as part of the IU and deemed it an appropriate condition. <br />1731 <br />Member Murphy noted that the Commission was simply reinforcing that recommendation <br />1732 <br />be included as part of the IU as well; and opined that the vagary had been resolved as <br />1733 <br />much as possible by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. <br />1734 <br />Member Stellmach stated that basically this resulted in the Commission deferring to <br />1735 <br />someone else to decide. <br />1736 <br />Member Murphy confirmed that intent, opining that the Commission, City Council, Board <br />1737 <br />of Appeals and had all gone around the track already in this decision-making and upheld <br />1738 <br />staff’s administrative determination.Since that group had already considered it, Member <br />1739 <br />Murphy clarified that it would now be up to them to consider this Commission <br />1740 <br />recommendation as well. <br />1741 <br />Member Cunningham opined that all questions that could be answered had been <br />1742 <br />answeredat this point; and further opined that she was prepared to make the best <br />1743 <br />possible recommendation she could at this point and with the information she had <br />1744 <br />available. <br />1745 <br />Member Bull stated that his preference would be to deny the motion and let the Vogels <br />1746 <br />continue with the IU through 2019.Member Bull opined that this CU provided them with <br />1747 <br />nothing other than permanency, while a 5 year IU can or may not be extended.Member <br />1748 <br />Bull further opined that there were a lot of issues in being a good neighbor; and used <br />1749 <br />cutting down the trees as viewed earlier as a good example creating some of this friction. <br />1750 <br />Chair Boguszewski stated that Member Stellmach brought up a good point with the <br />1751 <br />uncertainty with something that he considered was actually discoverable.Chair <br />1752 <br />Boguszewski further noted that Member Cunningham was correct in stating that <br />1753 <br />the Commission was doing the best it could under those conditions and without <br />1754 <br />additional discovery.Chair Boguszewski also noted that it part of the CU in <br />1755 <br />determining its performance standards to request things due to the finance issue. <br />1756 <br />Chair Boguszewski stated that he would like to investigate actual requirements of <br />1757 <br />the bank as to their actual needs.While recognizing that this issue has been before <br />1758 <br />the Commission and City several times now and for a long time, Chair <br />1759 <br />Boguszewski opined that since it’s now being considered a permanent use <br />1760 <br />through this CU, it required more detailed review. <br />1761 <br />While recognizing the unpopularity of the move, Chair Boguszewski stated his intent to <br />1762 <br />move to TABLEaction on this request, pending discovery and information represented in <br />1763 <br />areas identified tonight and uncertain to the Commission in areas as noted, including the <br />1764 <br />nature of the easement and whether it is feasible toplace the fence along the northern <br />1765 <br />edge of the property or where the fence could be placed closest to the northern edge of <br />1766 <br />the property line. <br />1767 <br />Member Stellmach agreed with Chair Boguszewski, stating his need to abstain from <br />1768 <br />taking action to approve or deny the request of Vogel Mechanical for a Conditional Use <br />1769 <br />without having that information available as part of his personal decision-making process. <br />1770 <br />MOTION <br />1771 <br />Member Boguszewskimoved, seconded by Member Stellmachto TABLE <br />1772 <br />consideration of this item to the next meeting of the Planning Commission (April 6, <br />1773 <br />2016); pending discovery and information represented in areas identified tonight <br />1774 <br /> <br />