My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1976.06.09 PC Minutes
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
1976 PC Minutes
>
1976.06.09 PC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2015 2:55:33 PM
Creation date
3/2/2015 12:35:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
6/9/1976
Document Type
Minutes
Commission Name
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Planning Commission Meeting <br />June 9, 1916 <br />Page 5 of 0 <br />Spitzer: I appreciate your concern, but these complaints should be filed <br />with the City Council. Has everyone who is seeking to address the chair <br />done so? Is there anyone who has not commented and would like to? <br />Steve Toensing: The pine trees weren't planted far enough into the swampy <br />area; the lombardy poplars weren't either. The variance is requested a <br />year after it should have been. I don't think they should be allowed a <br />variance. <br />Smith: We instructed you that the Special Use Permit was null and void <br />because they did not comply with Item #2, but didn't say that you only <br />consider Condition ;r2 and that is not the intention of the attorney in <br />his findings. We did direct you to hold a hearing but did not say it is <br />null and void and you should consider only Item #2. <br />Spitzer: Does anyone have any new material? <br />'•Taller:. Regarding the tree planting — I hereby submit a sworn affidavit <br />that the trees were planted a year ago. (?affidavit submitted) <br />Bra-nistedt: Perhaps there is a misunderstanding. Perhaps it should be <br />referred back to the Council to find out if item #2 is a misunderstanding? <br />Spitzer: Thank you — the hearing is now closed. (Time — 8:10 P.M.) <br />Declared five minute recess. <br />DENNIS BURDICK — PUBLIC HEARING <br />The public hearing for the purpose of granting a Special Use Permit <br />to Dennis Burdick, 14529 Forest Boulevard, to operate a retail motor <br />vehicle sales and service, contingent on the approval of the ordinance <br />amendment, was opened at 8:17 P.M. by Chairman Spitzer, who also read <br />the official notice of public hearing. <br />!attending were Spitzer, Ehret, Peloquin, and Peltier; also Bill <br />Schwab, Washington County Planner. <br />Spitzer explained that there was an earlier public hearing at 7:00 P.M. <br />for an ordinance amendment, which if passed, would allow retail motor veh— <br />icle sales and service in the Concentrated Business District by Special <br />Use Permit. In anticipation of the adoption of that amendment, Mr. Burdick <br />has applied for a special use permit. Burdick was asked to present his <br />plans. <br />Burdick stated his request is for auto sales and service, auto repai.r— <br />ing and reconditioning and related retail items. He also operates a body <br />shop which is in operation; but is grandfathered in. <br />Spitzer: Are there any questions from the floor? <br />Stephen Chapman: I would like to ask what promolgated the present amend - <br />12833 Goodview Av. vent. Was it this particular issue that brought this <br />about? <br />Spitzer: Yes, the ordinance as originally irritten , allowed motor vehicle <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.