01/03/2001 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board December 13, 2000 Page 3 Mr. Rafferty noted the five -acre requirement and criteria of hardship on the owner based on the size of the lot. He stated it clearly appears that beyond the western half of the property, it is not buildable for anything. Directly to the north, it is clearly all wetland. Mr. Rafferty noted the City goes the extra mile to get permissions from the neighbors so they are aware of the request, but the ordinance draws some "lines in the sand" to protect the interests of the City for future development. Mr. Rafferty stated he spoke with the surrounding land owners and one neighbor, who has a large investment, stated he has seen these plans and agrees with the request if the pole barn is located on the southern portion. Mr. Rafferty asked if the front elevation would contain a formal setting such as a concrete apron. Chair Schaps asked the applicant if he would like to make comment. Chris Lyden, applicant, stated it was not his plan to put a slab in front of the building but he has been considering some type of apron that the overhead door would come down on. He stated if it is the consent of the Board that a slab should be added, he would do so. Mr. Rafferty stated his concern that the front elev passerby. He suggested that a two to three foot Rafferty reviewed the recent request from the costs of the structure with a metal seam ro Mr. Schilling arrived at 6:43 p.m. tain a formal appearance to the provide that aspect. Mr. tikes Bank and inquired about the Mr. Lyden stated the issue is not o ut one of providing a quality building for his antique boat. He explaine ction as proposed would be more costly and he believes a wood type struc oncrete floor, due to its weight, is not appropriate for the site due to the wetland . Lyden advised that his front steps and other concrete slabs have dropped in ele ' ation so he believes a pole type structure is appropriate for this type of soil. With regard to the antique boat, Mr. Lyden explained that moisture would destroy it so the recommendation is for strong roof ventilation and no concrete floor. Chair Schaps stated his concern that during his eleven years on the Planning Commission, they have denied more than a dozen pole barn requests on this size of acreage. He stated he understands the soils issue, but no scientific or expert analysis on that aspect has been submitted. Because of that, he does not see how the specific findings of fact can be made to support a variance request while avoiding the establishment of a precedent. Chair Schaps noted the first criteria is whether the property can be put to a reasonable use without the variance. Thus, he can not conclude a wood barn cannot be constructed. The second criteria deals with special circumstances to the soils, which is not present since no scientific information has been presented. Chair Schaps stated the third criteria is to not convey a special privilege, which he believes approval would do since no scientific data has been provided. The fourth criteria to meet the intent of the ordinance has also not been met and upheld three times recently based on the aesthetic issues with a pole barn.