06-01-1981 Planning Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

© MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 1, 1981 The Planning Commission met on the above date. The fol lowing members were present: Jabbour, McDonald, Goetten, Adams, Frahro, Rovegno. Chairman Hammerel arrived at 7:40. Jo Ellen Hurr was not present for the Council. Mabusth represented the City staff. ATTENDANCE 7:30 PM Mabusth noted the certificate of mailing and the affidavit of publication. Mr. Watson, Mr. Evan's attorney, stated that the orginal owner never changed the drainage easements at the time of his lot line realignment. Staff went out and restaked the wetlands with previous owners surveyor, but the owner never made the change. Rovegno stated that the City was at fault for not requiring it. Staff e?:plained that the only means available for realigning the drain age easement line is to replat. Watson explained that his client only wishes to change the legal description in the flowage easement document and that a new document could be filed by the City. A.H. EVANS 575 Oxford Vacation #612 7:30-7:35 PM Rd. McDonald voted to table this application giving the attor ney an opportunity to consult with his client and the City. Rovegno seconded. Vote; Ayes (6), Nays (0). Mrs. McGowan was present along with her contractor Mr. Cleary. Robert Schneck was also present from the audience. Mr. Schneck contends the building of a horse barn at the proposed location on the McGowan's property will decrease the value of his property. A letter from the LaSeurs, the neighbors to the immediate north, was presented to the City stating that they had no objections to the building of the barn. JAMES MCGOWAN 3175 Jamestown Rd Variance #617 Planning Commission stated that to grant a variance for this application they would have to find hardships and that the applicant is responsible for meeting all the standards set forth in the Conditional Use Permit section of the application for horse barns. Jabbour stated that the applicant is entitled to keep three horses because of the size of the land. Adams stated that the land does not contain open pasture. The applicant agreed to move the proposed horse barn from the north property line, such location would not involve the removal of trees. It was also noted that the 78 ft setback would place it in a more central location. Mr. Cleary stated that the barn could not be placed to the east of the house because of the location of the drain- field and the topography also is too steep which would make it difficult for construction. Rovegno moved to recommend approval of the variance set- back of 72 ft,for the proposed horse barn of the