My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL MINUTES 07171984
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
1984
>
PL MINUTES 07171984
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 6:04:32 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 6:04:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
21
SP Folder Name
PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1984
SP Name
PL MINUTES 07171984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
-3- <br /> After Mr. Root requested a clarification on the. watershed, the <br /> Planning Commission' s consensus was that they did not feel the <br /> • drainage will change. Commissioner Bjorklund perceives that any <br /> addition, with or without a variance , would increase the runoff . <br /> Commissioner Bjorklund queried Mr.. Root about his own interpretation <br /> of a bay. Mr. Root indicato.d he believes a bay must be- curved and <br /> should not be more than 250 of the width of the dwelling. The <br /> Chairman asked Mr. Root if the proposed structure was disturbing to <br /> him because, as a neighbor; it would have windows in it and Mr. Root <br /> answered windows had nothing to do with his objection and that he <br /> objects to the structure itself being too close to his property <br /> line. He went on to say he feels the building codes should be <br /> adhered to and by granting variances , we allow people to build... <br /> anything they want. He feels strongly he he has the right to object <br /> to a variance from the building code. Mr. Root also stated he was <br /> Pot only speaking for himself and had obtained the signatures of <br /> other neighbors who are against the proposal. No other persons . present, <br /> however, spoke against the proposal . <br /> Before Pat DeKanick began to speak for the proposal, the Planning <br /> Commission requested an exact measurement of the proposed structure. <br /> Mr. DeKanick indicated, in response, that 12 feet would be added on <br /> to the existing house, plus 2 feet additional for the porch, for a <br /> total of 14 feet overall. <br /> Mrs. DeKanick then read from law books the basis of variances . She <br /> stated that she feels that Mr. Root obviously does not understand <br /> • variances . In the book, under zoning changes , it showed that vari- <br /> ances allow the individual landowner to deviate somewhat from zoning <br /> code requirements and variances do not require a zoning change. <br /> However, the variance must not change the basic characteristics of the <br /> neighborhood, according to the law book. The applicant also commented <br /> on Mr. Root's concern about the drainage problem. She said at the <br /> time Mr. Root built his house he was aware of thewater problem. <br /> Mrs . DeKanick also stated that when they (DeKanick's) built their <br /> house in 1959 , they were the first new house on that side of the <br /> block . In 1961 the house to the north was built a little bit higher <br /> than the DeKanick' s since the . ground level for that house is built <br /> up. She feels that as the first people on the block, they are not <br /> causing the drainage problems and she also cited other neighbors with <br /> water problems . <br /> The Chairman asked if there were any other questions . Commissioner <br /> Bjorklund read the section of the Ordinance regarding permitted <br /> encroachments, which .may .come within 3 feet of the property- line . <br /> He perceived the- DeKanick' s held to that regulation. However, the <br /> following several sections of the Ordinance state that certain en- <br /> croachments may not be within 5 feet of the property line, the <br /> Commissioner continued. He then asked Mrs . DeKanick what she felt the <br /> width of a bay should be. She stated her interpretation of the <br /> ordinance is that it could be any size, however, she does not feel it <br /> should be as large as 25 feet, but did not feel 12-15 feet to be <br /> • excessive. <br /> Commissioner Bjorklund also asked why the original plans , which indi- <br /> cated the proposed structure would extend 16 feet back from the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.