Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 <br />McBride explained that the previous applicant, Gloria <br />Favis, has given the property back to Jim Marshall. <br />McBride reported that he is here this evening <br />representing Marshall since he could better answer any <br />questions related to construction design. McBride <br />reported that Marshall has owned the property for about <br />two years and was not aware of the problems with the <br />structure when he bought it. McBride reported that the <br />applicant is only asking to be able to remodel the <br />structure and plans to live in the structure once the <br />remodeling is completed. <br />Garske pointed out that a variance is being requested, <br />and the only basis for approving a variance is <br />economic, which does not qualify. Economic <br />circumstances are not enough to justify granting a <br />variance. <br />Herkenhoff asked the County's plans for Little Canada <br />Road, and if there are any long -range plans for <br />development along this road. <br />DeLonais suggested that the Planning Commission and the <br />City Council need to put their heads together and <br />establish some long -range plans for this section of <br />Little Canada Road. <br />DeLonais asked if the City could establish a new <br />district for the homes in this area due to their <br />non - conformity. <br />The City Planner replied that this could not be done <br />since the area is overlaid by DNR Shoreland Regulations <br />which the City must uphold. <br />Garske agreed with the need to determine the County's <br />plans for the area. <br />The City Planner noted that the variance being <br />requested is only to the 50o rule, and not whether the <br />use will continue. Basically, the variance is asking <br />whether the applicant can take nothing and make a house <br />out of it. <br />Pedersen pointed out that there are a couple of other <br />homes in the area in very bad shape. <br />McBride pointed out that at the last Planning <br />Commission meeting, the Commission suggested that if <br />additional improvements were made, and the Building <br />Inspector approved the proposal, the Commission would <br />support it. Now the Commission sounds like it is <br />against the proposal. <br />Page 6 <br />