My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL MINUTES 05201986
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
1986
>
PL MINUTES 05201986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 5:55:34 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 5:55:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
21
SP Folder Name
PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1986
SP Name
PL MINUTES 05201986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
-6 <br /> • 1 The Manager reported no one from the neighborhood had expressed opposition to the <br /> 2 variance and- no persons except Mr. -and Mrs. Tokar were present for the hearing . <br /> 3 The hearing was closed. at 8:43 P.M. for the development of a recommendation to <br /> 4 the Council . <br /> 5 <br /> 6 Commissioner- Wagner indicated he perceived only a minimum variance was being <br /> 7 requested and Commissioner Madden commented that he had seen for himself that <br /> 8 there were at least two feet of alley right-of-way behind the Tokar garage <br /> 9 which would leave five feet between the proposed garage and the alley itself. <br /> 10 <br /> 11 Motion by Commissioner Bowerman and seconded by Commissioner Wagner to recommend <br /> 12 the Council grant the variance to the ordinance setback requirements for detached <br /> 13 garages which would allow Robert D. Tokar to replace his existing garage with <br /> 14 the larger detached garage he proposes to construct in .the same location to <br /> 15 the rear-of -his property -at 2528 Murray Avenue N.E. , as long as the garage <br /> 16 overhang for which the variance is required is no more: than 12 inches wide, <br /> 17 finding that: <br /> 18 <br /> 19 1 . The three questions on the application which are required by statute to be <br /> 20 answered affirmatively had been answered thus by the applicant and accepted <br /> 21 by the Planning Commission; <br /> 22 <br /> 23 2. There was no neighbor opposition-to the variance expressed either to staff <br /> .24 prior to the Commission hearing- or during the hearing May 20th and, in fact, <br /> 25 11 of Mr., Tokar's closest neighbors had signed a petition (to be attached to <br /> 26 the application)_ which indicated no opposition to the City granting the <br /> • 27 variance; <br /> 28 <br /> 29 3, It appears the proposed 'structure itself would meet the setback requirements <br /> 30 of the Zoning Ordinance and .it was .only the proposed overhang which would <br /> 31 encroach into the required 3 foot setback; and <br /> 32 <br /> 33 4. The perception i.s -that all. the garages 'in that area were built either three <br /> 34 feet or less from the property lines due to faulty lot surveys for the <br /> 35 entire area at the time they were constructed thirty years ago. <br /> 36 <br /> 37 Motion carried unanimously. <br /> 38 <br /> i 39 There was a brief discussion of the City' s efforts to clean up a Silver Lane pro- <br /> 40 perty where the neighbors perceive a junk dealer to operate, The Manager told <br />.I <br /> 41 Commissioner Jones the owner had called him and promised to take care of the <br /> 42 problem now that he is out of the hospital after suffering a heart attack. <br /> 43 <br /> 44 Motion by Comm.issi:oner Bowerman and seconded by Commissioner Jones to adjourn <br /> i <br /> 45 the meeting at 8;55 P.M. <br /> I 46 <br /> 47 Motion carried unanimously, <br /> 48 <br /> 49 Respectfully submitted_ , <br /> 50 <br /> 51 Helen Crowe, Secretary <br /> • 52 <br /> i 53 <br /> 54 <br /> 55 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.