10-28-1992 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 8, 1992 Garske felt that there will have to be a compromise somewhere. Melchoir reported that the neighbors are willing to compromise, but not by cutting the sideyard setback in half. Melchoir felt that was too large a variance to be acceptable. Keis pointed out that the Planner has suggested that the house be moved five feet to the east. However, this would cause a setback variance on the east side of the lot as well as the west. This would result in the house being 21 feet from the road. Melchoir asked if the property owner would be willing to locate the garage on the southwest side of the lot, rather than the north. Burnham reported that the buyers do not want the garage on the west side of the lot. It was suggested that the house could be placed further back on the lot. Keis stated that he liked the idea of moving the house five feet to the east. It was pointed out that the issue of the width of the lot will need to be resolved. Herkenhoff suggested that the matter be tabled, and the applicant come back to the next meeting with a better plan. Burnham asked for suggestions. Garske felt that the driveway on the north side of the lot just 30 feet from the corner was too close. Garske suggested placing the driveway on the west side of the lot. Garske pointed out to Burnham that it appears the neighbors are not opposed to a variance of a few feet, but do oppose the size variance being requested. Herkenhoff recommended that the application for sideyard setback variance for property at 90 Rosewood Drive be tabled, instructing the applicant to come back with another alternative, and instructing the applicant to determine the exact width of the property. Motion seconded by Garske. Motion carried 7 - 0. AUTO Hunting reviewed the proposed ordinance regulating auto SALES sales in the City's Industrial areas. It was noted Page 11 Page 13