Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />Planning Commission <br />Oct. 9, 1986 <br />Robert Moyer <br />Shed <br />Construction <br />Mr. Robert Moyer, 811 Lahore Road, appeared before the Commission <br />requesting aoproval to construct a 240 square foot shed on his <br />property. Mr. Moyer reported that he began construction of the <br />shed, however, was stopped by the Building Inspector because he <br />did not have a building permit. <br />Moyer further reported that prior to beginning construction of the <br />shed, he contacted the City Center and was informed that he did not <br />need a building permit. Moyer reported that he informed City staff <br />at that time that he wanted to construct a shed and also reported <br />the dimensions of the shed. <br />Moyer reported that now the Building Inspector has informed him that <br />he does need a building permit as the shed is over 120 square feet <br />in size and also that the shed is too close to the road. <br />Mrs. Timmons was very concerned that Mr. Moyer received incorrect <br />information from the City Center, and pointed out the recent <br />incident where Pat Frattalone also received misinformation from City <br />staff. <br />Timmons stated that there is a Council liaison person in charge <br />of the City Clerk's office, and felt that there was a problem with <br />lack of communication in the office. <br />Timmons did not feel that Mr. Moyer should be penalized for a mistake <br />on the part; of the City and felt that the City should live with <br />this mistake and take measures to ensure that similar mistakes do <br />not occur. <br />However, Timmons felt that from a public safety standpoint and an <br />aesthetic standpoint, the shed should be moved within the proper <br />setbacks. <br />Mr. DeLonais recommended that the Robert Moyer conditional use <br />permit request for construction of an accessory building be referred <br />to the City Council to let them correct the mistake that was made <br />on the pert of the City. <br />Motion seconded by Mr. Perlinger. <br />Motion carried 5 - 0. <br />Mr. Davison did not feel that the matter should have come before <br />the Planning Commission, as the matter is beyond planning as the <br />construction of the shed has already begun. Davison pointed out <br />that the matter has been complicated by things beyond the control <br />of the Planning Commission, and had the matter come before the <br />Commission prior to construction, the Planning Commission might <br />have handled it differently. <br />Page - <br />