My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-25-1991 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
09-25-1991 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2013 12:58:29 PM
Creation date
7/23/2013 12:56:35 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
75
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 <br />Bendel pointed out that the story has changed from the <br />last meeting, and also pointed out that at the last <br />meeting the applicant was different, and the Commission <br />was dealing with a person who was very stressed. <br />Herkenhoff agreed that tonight the matter is being <br />discussed without the emotions that were present at the <br />last meeting. <br />McBride did not feel the consideration of the matter <br />should change because the applicants are different. <br />Drabik expressed concern that there has been some <br />game - playing in this matter, noting that the Planning <br />Commission has never gotten the information that it has <br />requested throughout the process. Drabik suggested <br />that the entire matter is about money, and a variance <br />cannot be granted for an economic hardship. <br />Herkenhoff asked if the City wanted to see the property <br />as an empty lot or a structure that conforms to the <br />others in the area. <br />DeLonais suggested that the proposal before the <br />Commission was no more than tearing down the existing <br />structure and rebuilding a new one. <br />McBride disagreed, and reported that he has not opened <br />up the structure to determine the extent of replacement <br />as yet. McBride suggested that the roof joists were <br />fine. <br />Drabik suggested that going beyond the 50% was a <br />rebuild. <br />McBride protested the $9,000 valuation that has been <br />established for the property, and suggested that he may <br />pursue that matter in another direction. <br />Bendel suggested that this may be the route that should <br />be taken. Bendel pointed out that the variance <br />question is coming down to money, and economic hardship <br />is not a basis for granting a variance. <br />McBride pointed out that the owner just wants to <br />remodel his property so that it conforms to the others <br />on the block. <br />Pat Molihan, 37 Round Lake Trail, reported that he <br />lives across the lake from the property in question and <br />he does not appreciate looking at the house in the <br />condition that it is. Molihan reported that there are <br />three properties in this area that are in bad shape, <br />and he is disappointed that the City does not show more <br />concern about aesthetics. <br />Page 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.