Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 18, 1991 <br /> Page 6 <br /> • 1 PUBLIC HEARING: <br /> 2 <br /> 3 Chairman Madden opened the public hearing at 8:30 p.m., and invited Steve <br /> 4 Barli of Phoenix Construction N.W., Inc. to present -his petition to the <br /> 5 Commission. <br /> 6 <br /> 7 Mr. Barli stated that Phoenix was asked by the management of Walker on <br /> 8 Kenzie to construct the canopy for safety reasons. He noted that in addition to <br /> 9 the dangerous slipperiness of the ice, a potential fire hazard exists when the ice <br /> 10 builds up to the point where the door cannot be opened. He stated that the <br /> 11 canopy will be constructed as soon as the permit can be obtained. <br /> 12 - <br /> 13 The public hearing was closed at 8:33 p.m. <br /> 14 <br /> 15 Motion by Franzese, seconded by Werenicz, to recommend that City Council <br /> 16 approve a sixteen-foot variance on the southeast side of Walker on Kenzie, <br /> 17 2626 Kenzie Terrace, for the purpose of allowing Phoenix Construction N.W., <br /> 18 Inc. to construct a canopy eight feet in length, nine feet from the property line, <br /> 19 in order to remedy ice buildup at the southeast entrance; noting that the three <br /> 20 statutory requirements for a variance were met; and noting that no one <br /> 21 appeared in opposition to the request. <br /> 22 <br /> 23 Motion carried unanimously. <br /> 24 <br /> 25 B. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RE: REZONING LAKESHORE <br /> 26 PROPERTIES. <br /> 27 <br /> 28 Chairman Madden introduced the issue by stating that the Planning <br /> 29 Commission will consider the creation of a new zoning district, R-1 A, applicable <br /> 30 to single-family homes around Silver Lake to protect the natural amenities of the <br /> 31 lake and to recognize the unique features of the land. <br /> 32 <br /> 33- No one present failed to receive notice of the hearing or objected to its content. <br /> 34 <br /> 35 STAFF REPORT: <br /> 36 <br /> 37 City Manager Burt explained that the new zoning district is sought because of <br /> 38 current setback requirements that create hardships for people who are building <br /> 39 or remodeling. The City requires that homes be set back thirty feet or equal to <br /> 40 the the average of the two adjacent homes. In cases where smaller, older <br /> 41 homes are set back fifty or sixty feet from the street, this creates a problem for <br /> 42 those wishing to build in between such sites. Additionally, the Department of <br />