Laserfiche WebLink
imRins or n njunme cofiiiMidi me I jun c, !§•• <br />ii2t2 COTIMOMI <br />Dale Gustafson addressed the wetland issue noting the <br />hardship as the topography of slopes and wetlands. He <br />stated that an alternative location for the tennis court <br />would require relocation of the sewer line and the loss <br />of many trees. <br />atated he has never and will never approve of <br />filling a wetland area. <br />Planning Commission recommended relocating the tennis <br />court to a location not disturbing the wetland and move <br />the sewer line to accomodate this. <br />i:.. <br />Nabusth recommended that the City Engineer review the <br />and determine the best location for the <br />tennis court. She advised applicant that any plans for <br />grading the shoreline and rip rap work would require a <br />separate variance and conditional use permit. <br />There were no comments from the public regardino this matter. <br />i SA.ll IWB <br />It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to table <br />this application per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes <br />4, Mays 0. <br />M : I ••#1203 CART ft BETH <br />3550 UVIMBSTOM AVWIB ^ ^ <br />APm>Tmi>f!BCT VAMIAMCB <br />PUBLIC BBARIMG 10s20>10i35 <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. <br />Gary ft Beth Eschar were present for this matter. <br />Mabusth explained the request for an after-the-fact <br />variance to allow a newly constructed shed attached to <br />the existing detached garage. She noted a discrepancy <br />of a lot line stake which made applicant not realise <br />that he was building on the lot line. In addition, <br />applicant felt that a building permit was not required <br />because he was merely replacing an existing shed. <br />Mr. Escher stated that the new shed does not extend any <br />further onto the lot line than the old shed. He stated <br />he talked to the son-in-law (who will be buying the <br />property) of the owner of the adjacent affected property <br />and concern was expressed regarding keeping a 10' <br />setback between the subject shed and their house for <br />fire reasons. Mr. Escher stated that his shed is 19' <br />from the adjacent property's house.