Laserfiche WebLink
CONT .) <br />. LARSON : <br />erry Ave. <br />onal Use i <br />I <br />MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 17, 1981 Page 5 <br />Applicant was present. Application was referred back to <br />the Planning Commission for clarification of the accessory <br />structures on the property. The structure to be considered <br />IS a newly built sauna 1 ft. from the property line. <br />Applicant stated that he had no problem in moving the <br />sauna to meet all setbacks. In fact he had considered <br />locating the sauna inside the existing garage. <br />Hurr suggested that a building permit be taken out for the <br />sauna. <br />Goetten questioned the structure closest to Rest Point Lane? <br />Mabusth explained that this would be removed. <br />Goetten moved to approve the Richard Mich variance application <br />subject to the following conditions: <br />1 — Relocating of gas line at the applicants expense <br />2 - Car access to subject lot may only be from Rest Point <br />Lane. <br />3 “ Existing single car garage to remain for storage purposesonly. <br />4 - Sauna structure to remain if applicant agrees to move <br />it to meet all setbacks. <br />5 - Building permit to be taken out for sauna. <br />b - Removed existing shed closest to Rest Point Lane. <br />Jabbour seconded. Vote: Ayes (3), Nays (0). <br />RICHARD P. MICH <br />1373 Rest Point Rd <br />Variance <br />#631 <br />Applicant was present. It was noted for the record that the <br />revised plans submitted were approved by the City Engineer. <br />Mabusth noted that the access to residential Lot 3 will be <br />via a shared access with the fabric shop along the south <br />property line. Applicant will have to grant 24* wide drive­ <br />way easement and utilities easement in favor of Lot 3. <br />McDonald was concerned t..at the commercial use will tend <br />to make more traffic than a residential use. Also improve­ <br />ment to the south should be limited to 1 access. <br />Goetten asked when construction would be started. Applicant <br />stated as soon as they get approval. <br />Jabbour was concerned that a buffer area be recognized for <br />the residential property to the rear and that it must be a <br />10 ft. buffer area. <br />McDonald also stressed to the applicant the need for him to <br />combine Lots 1 & 2. Nordblom was hesitant because this would <br />mean he would have to reapply for a subdivision if he wished <br />^o split them. Staff advised this would be a simple pro­ <br />cedure and not involve the regular procedure. <br />NORBLOM & ASSOC. <br />2535 Shadywood Rd. <br />Commercial Site <br />Plan <br />#637 ■i <br />}\ <br />1 <br />i