Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION NERTING HELD JULY 21 19 <br />86 <br />#1052 SPENCE continued <br />John Spence was present for this matter and stated that <br />his original request was to replace the dama ed portion <br />of snow fence, but would like to amend his g e on <br />request for <br />replace the entire fence with a 3-1/2' cedar fence with <br />a matching gate in the idea �i,:d .c location as the <br />existing fence. He stated that he needed the fence to <br />control debris from the County road and felt that the <br />better quality fence would enhance the ro ez ty. <br />Regarding the shed, he would like to rep <br />lace t p the damage <br />shed with a new 8'x6' shed in order to store a <br />.Lawnmower, boating equipment. A lock box is not <br />large enough to store these things, noting the distance <br />from the house to lake too far to carry these items <br />across the County road safely. He also noted that he <br />would like to replace the shed on the e-istin <br />foundation 6' from the south lot line which abu g <br />tts the <br />Ci t y's property. If he is required to re 1 ocate the shed <br />the required 10' from the lot line it would be more <br />visi bJ e to, the road. <br />No onc! wa:= present from the public regarding this matter <br />and the pleb.' i.c hearing was closed. <br />Ge�Etten stated that it was her understanding that the <br />have never allowed rebuilding of structures within y <br />thin the <br />C-75' setback and she is not against the fence, but is <br />not in favor of rebuilding the shed. <br />McDonald agreed that for safety reasons, applicant <br />srou lC be allowed the larger shed to store the items <br />necessary. <br />It was moved by Callahan, seconded by McDonald, to <br />recommend approval of hardcover and lakeshore, street <br />and side setback variances required to permit. the <br />installation c)f new fencing and rebuilding of accessory <br />stricture, citing the safetyreasons to allow <br />o the shed. <br />Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 1. Goetten voted nay for the <br />reason she previously stated. <br /># 10 5 3 RAY14OND J . ROSAK <br />3265 CARMAN ROAD <br />CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE <br />PUBLIC HEARING 10 : 2 3 - 1) :10 <br />Ti-e Affidavit oA Purl ication and Certificate of Mailing <br />wa a :�ote�� � 9 <br />.Ray,:!ond Koc-,:; was present for this matter, as was his <br />planner, Greg Kopischke. Mr. Kosak stated that he is <br />trying t-o upgrade his property so it is consistant with <br />the neighboring properties. He noted that a portion of <br />thle proposed plan has already been constructed without a <br />perwi f due to lack of knowledge regarding permits. <br />