12-20-1976 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF A PLANNING OMUSSION MEETING HELD DECEMBER 6, 1976 - PAGE 3 3.Remodel Existing House - existing, 14* setback requested. Adjoining neighbors objected to any side yard variances. Planning Canmission felt that house could be designed to meet setback requirements as no hardship was demonstrated. Some of the Planning Coranission Members felt that remodel ing of the existing structure migiit solve the problem. The Zoning Administrator informed the Commission and the j^plicant that an addition of more than 50% of the value of the house would constitute a new structure and, there fore, must meet zoning requirements or obtain necessary variances. After a brief discussion, McDonald moved, Pesek seconded, to table this matter until the December 20th meeting to ^able applicant to decide which plan he wanted to submit. Motion - Ayes (6), Nays (0). Chairwoman Dunlap informed everyone present that she had received a phone call fran Mrs. Gasch saying that she would be late for the meeting and requesting that her item be delayed until later in the evening. Two adjoining property owners, Mrs. Ward Parten and Mrs. Harry Larson, were present. Mrs. Gasch also requested that the letters she sent to the Comnission be read to the neighbors present at this meeting. Chairwoman Dunlap read these letters vdiich contained the chain of events v^hich led to the request to ^ild a 12* fence. One such event was the location and positioning of Mrs. Parten*s house. Mrs. Gasdi had the understanding that vdien the permit was issued for the new house it was to be built on the same location as the one that was burned dom. Mrs. Gasch feels that the house is located closer to the lake and is positioned in such a way as to overlook her property v4ien viewing the lake, ^!rs. Parten *s response to this was that she felt her house was in line with the neighbors if you followed the shoreline. She also explained that her house was positioned as such to utilize the sun for heat and light. Several Planning Comnission Members did feel that the Parten licuse was built peculiar to the lot and did, in fact, use the neighbor's lot for view of the lake. Mrs. Parten*s proposal was approved as submitted by Council on July 26, 1976. The ^ggestion was made that some greenery be planted to provide the necessary privacy whicli Mrs. Gasch is requesting. The Comnission felt this would be more appealing than the proposed fence. Mrs. Parten stated that she would be willing to work out some arrangement with Mrs. Gasch. After all the comments were heard, Qiairwoman IXmlap stated that this matter would be continued when tlie applicant arrived. WARREN ORTENBLAD (Continued) #195 MRS. ROBERT GASCH 1030 TO^KAIVA RCAD VARIANCE (#199) HG& ♦