Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Glazer stated that by stating that a two family residence is necessary to <br />serve as a buffer between commercial property on #10 and residential property <br />is to subject more people to a commercial zoning than you would if you did not <br />buffer it. Mr. A. R. Goettsch, 5229 O'Connell Drive, stated that he was in the <br />building trade and has seen how run down double bungalows can get. Mrs. William <br />Lake, 5259 O'Connell Drive, asked to have the commercial property on #10 changed <br />to residential. <br />Mr. Eigenheer explained that his proposal would make the area better by constructing <br />a two family residence than by attempting to divide the lots thereby constructing <br />two or three single family homes. He stated that the price of the double bungalow <br />would be between $45,000 and $50,000. <br />Residents expressed the desire to know who would buy the lot South of the double <br />bungalow and across the street. Mrs. Haake, 1740 County Road I, wanted to know <br />if Mr. Eigenheer had planned on straddling the easement with his double bungalow. <br />He explained that by building a double bungalow he would be using two lots, and <br />not just the lot the easement is on. <br />Mayor Neisen asked whether there was anyone in the audience who spoke in favor of <br />the proposal. No one stood up in favor. Mayor Neisen closed the hearing at 9:05 <br />P.M. <br />Councilman Pickar asked if Mr. Eigenheer was planning on building on Lot 3 this <br />year. Mr. Eigenheer explained that he had plans to develop all remaining single <br />family lots in the area this year. <br />Councilman Pickar asked whether there had been any complaints on weeds on the lots <br />last year. Mayor Neisen confirmed that there were complaints and that they were <br />turned over to the Weed Inspector. <br />Councilman Baumgartner asked Mr. Eigenheer if the easement was put in before the <br />property was bought. Mr. Eigenheer stated that it was put in after. Councilman <br />Baumgartner asked if it would not be better to make three 75 foot lots. Mr. <br />Eigenheer explained that the area would look worse and that the Planning Commission <br />may not go along with the proposal. He said it would be fine with him. Councilman <br />Johnson asked whether Mr. Eigenheer had received payment for the easement. Mr. <br />Eigenheer replied "no ". <br />Councilman Hodges stated that he could see a double bungalow as a buffer but that <br />he felt he must consider the desire of the people living there. <br />Attorney Meyers advised the Council that prior to a vote on the proposal they <br />should consider it relative to health, safety and welfare, and that if they <br />were to deny the proposal it must be on those grounds. In addition he stated <br />that a 4/5's vote was needed for passage. <br />MSP (Baumgartner /Johnson) To deny the rezoning as requested. 5 Ayes <br />Clerk- Administrator Zylla's Report (Continued) <br />MSP (Neisen /Hodges) To set a hearing on May 8th at 8 :30 P.M. to consider <br />adopting new permit fees relative to one and two family dwellings. 5 Ayes <br />