CC PACKET 06281983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3 - • areas to the back of his property. The resident told of the many ways in which he had supported the church which at first was "very poor" and of his disappointment that church officials hadn'.t dis- cussed their expansion- plans- with him. He indicated the neighbors had always understood any expansion of the church property would be to the north where the 150 foot wall would only face the school. Mr. Esau also contended the addition would not be of benefit to the City if adjoining property values and taxes were -decreased. Mr. and Mrs. Lawrence Antczak whose backyard at 3501 36th Avenue N.E. is about 75 % blocked off by the existing structure said, with the expansion their property would be completely cut off and the problems they now experience with runoff would be intensified. They joined Mr. Esau in saying they supported an expansion of the church in any other direction than proposed and were disappointed that they had not been consulted-about the proposed addition. Mr. Dick Jones indicated he appreciated the neighbors ' comments and apologized for not taking the initiative for talking to them, which he had believed another church official had- done. He said the church needs the added space primarily for classrooms and the original plans which had -been referred to that evening calling for an expansion to the north had been drawn by a high school student and if followed would prevent the addition of a -new sanctuary later when the church could afford it. The trustee said • he would talk to the architect to see what could be done to prevent the runoff onto the adjacent- proper-ties and would be open to suggestions from the neighbors about the plans. Commissioner Bowerman recalled the questions raised about the obstruction -of sunlight -by-- the -elderly housing structure on Kenzie Terrace and wondered what effect 34 feet of obstruction would have across the back of the adjacent properties , even though the church is north of the adjacent properties. Since the church official had indicated the final plans would not be submitted for approval before the annual meeting in January, Commissioner Jones asked him .-if he would be amenable to tabling the Commission decision for a month in which time- the proposal could be present to the neighbors- at a meeting between the groups . Mr. Dick Jones indicated he would welcome an opportunity to invite the neighbors to meet with the building committee and the pastor to try to work out their differences . Mr. Esau then indicated he also was happy to hear. the Commission member' s suggestion since he per- ceives the church has done a wonderful job of bringing its message to- the community and he had. not understood why the decision had been made to obstruct our property. At 8: 30 p.m. the Chair. closed the public hearing for consideration by the Commission. Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he would oppose tabling the matter if no major change in the proposal were to be made. He recalled. previous instances where neighbor opposition had atrophied with time. He-. believed certain areas of concern about the proposal- had not been -addressed including what he perceives is a departure from traditional-* practice in the City of having at least .150 feet of backyard between :dwellings . Mr. Esau reported his home