Laserfiche WebLink
i 9 MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD OCTOBER 21, 1985. PAGE 10 <br />luest <br />inces <br />1 its <br />round <br />sting <br />for <br />1 158 <br />)ver. <br />that <br />)ving <br />jntly <br />juate <br />iblic <br />1978 McENENY continued <br />Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that a clause in the <br />resolution approving Kelly Cove stated "Outlot A may never be <br />used for future residential construction, but shall remain <br />as an open space area as density credit for existing duplex <br />units...”. <br />McDonald stated that she felt by granting this variance they <br />would be setting a precedent for "open space". <br />There were no persons present objecting and the public <br />hearing was closed. <br />It was moved by Chairman Callahan, seconded by Kelley, to <br />deny the variance application. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 2. <br />Rovegno and Sime voted nay. <br />Rovegno voted nay stating he felt it was a reasonable request <br />and that it would be more appropriate to park the cars indoors <br />rather than in view outside. <br />Sime voted nay stating that denying solely because of the <br />previous "open space" clause was not taking a realistic view <br />point. <br />#983 WALTER H. PEMBERTON <br />3580 NORTH SHORE DRIVE <br />VARIANCE <br />PUBLIC HEARING 10:26 - 10:50 <br />The Certificate of mailing and affidavit of publication was <br />noted. <br />nmend <br />ices, <br />E and <br />Lonal <br />5S 6, <br />n was <br />juest <br />; A of <br />ture, <br />lawn <br />they <br />nt in <br />s for <br />noval <br />ge to <br />The purpose of the public hearing was to consider a request to <br />remove an existing cabin and replace with a new home and <br />detached garage. The following 7 variances are required for <br />the proposed site plan; lot area, lot width, hardcover, <br />average setback, conditional use permit for filling, <br />lakeshore setback, and front setback. <br />Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron reviewed the <br />proposed site plan. <br />Goetten questioned why the driveway and garage needed to be <br />located in the back of the house rather than the road side. <br />Mr. & Mrs. Walter Pemberton were present for this matter. <br />Mrs. Pemberton stated the reason for the driveway and garage <br />location was for aesthetic reasons and to conform with the <br />neighboring two houses. <br />Chairman Callahan questioned the buildability of this <br />extremely difficult lot. <br />The Pemberton's builder was present and stated the proposed <br />plan could be done.