My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-25-1995 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
01-25-1995 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/10/2014 2:20:44 PM
Creation date
1/10/2014 2:18:28 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
145
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 />JANUARY 12, 1995 <br />present, and all indicated that they were opposed to <br />the proposal. <br />Garske felt there was a huge gap in the apparent value <br />of the home being proposed and the pictures of the <br />existing homes in the neighborhood. <br />Knudsen pointed out that if Mr. Graf proposed to build <br />a new house exactly like this one, the matter would not <br />require a Conditional Use Permit, and Mr. Graf would be <br />issued a building permit. Therefore, Knudsen saw no <br />reason to debate the structure itself. Knudsen felt <br />the water was a separate issue, and if the lot is not <br />buildable, the Commission should not even be discussing <br />the issue. <br />Schletty felt the difference is a new house versus <br />moving in a 40 year old house. Schletty felt there was <br />a big difference between 12 year old homes and 40 year <br />old homes. <br />Remerowski stated that the property owners wish to <br />protect their property values. <br />The City Planner reported that a CUP is required to <br />move a house into the City so that the City can ensure <br />that such houses are brought up to Code. The City also <br />requires a bond in order to protect the City's streets <br />from any damage that could result from the moving. The <br />Planner agreed that if the proposal were to stick build <br />the same house on the lot, the matter would go through <br />the Building Inspector's office and not require a CUP. <br />Carl Carlson, 261 Twin Lake Trail, asked if there were <br />any restrictive covenants for the area. <br />The Planner replied that would have been something the <br />developer would have recorded against the property. <br />The Planner pointed out that the City does not have an <br />architectural review process, and does not have a Code <br />giving the City authority to regulate values or <br />determine what fits into a neighborhood. The Planner <br />reported that under the Administrative Section of the <br />Ordinance, there are five criteria which must be met <br />for Conditional Use Permits, but these criteria <br />generally apply to classes of property. The Planner <br />stated that if a house of a certain size can be built <br />in a neighborhood versus moved in, the City cannot <br />6 <br />Page 103 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.