Laserfiche WebLink
IPUTF_S <br />City Council <br />fl11 2. lcgmf: <br />E'deerton <br />Drii race <br />Problem <br />Arenda <br />Iten Ho. <br />Accessory <br />3uilding <br />Setback <br />Agenda <br />Item No. 10 <br />*. Fahey reported that he has had conversatio with the City Enoineer, <br />51 ic .!orks and rr. Lund, the property owner nvolved, repardino <br />drainage problem on Edgerton. It has b n decided that the <br />will be raised four inches and the - aa swaled and sodded. <br />tl; <br />dral <br />The En: neer reported that the drivewa will still have the <br />drain as exists presently, but there vill be a solid cover on it. <br />3lesener po nted out that all the andscaoing will have to be done <br />in the right-4 f-way as r. Lund. All not let anyone on his property. <br />Fahey reported t. <br />at the south end. o <br />front yard, however, <br />street. <br />t Lund's <br />his pr <br />o eference would be to have the <br />arty rather than in the middle <br />rain was placed at the low point <br />drain <br />of the <br />in the <br />Ir. Fahey Pointed w.t, that e Planning Commission has tabled <br />action on the set! uck for acc sory buildings pending further <br />infornation fror the Council. <br />Mr. 3lesener 4orted that he broup. t this issue up when sopleone <br />on Stark St. •et wanted to build a ga ge and learned that it <br />had to be tback 30 feet from the rea property line. Under <br />the old dinance the setback would hay- been 5 feet from the <br />rear pr. rerty linP. 3lesener reported t when the ordinance <br />was an oded in 1905, this provision was le « out and he believes <br />the 0 uncil thought the rear yard setback .0 accessory buildinus <br />woul be covered by the 10 foot setback provi on. However, the <br />set ick ended up to be 30 feet. <br />e Planner agreed that the omission was unintentio 1 , but was <br />tst an oversight. <br />Poolside <br />Mene8 <br />Addition <br />Fahey requested that the Planner give the Planninq Conmi_ ion a <br />memo explaining the situation. <br />Mr. Anderson, owner of Pool sicte, appeared before the Council and <br />reported that he just learned that his neighbors have concerns <br />regarding the Pooiside property. <br />Fahey informed Anderson that the neighbors are concerned about <br />the amount of traffic on Jackson Street from the Poolside <br />business, includind truck and semi traffic. <br />Scal zo pointed out that Jackson Street is not a cl-ton road and, <br />therefore, should not have semi traffic on it. <br />Anderson reported that semis have always used Jackson for making <br />deliveries and there have been no complaints in the past. Anderson <br />felt the neighbors were comlaining due to an access he closed off <br />through his property to County Road C. <br />Pajp <br />