Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 <br />#1364 BDimi GAGS <br />480 TOMKAMA HOAD <br />COmiTIOHAL USB PBRMIT/VARIAIICE <br />PUBLICB HBARIHG 9:00 P.M. - 9:10 P.M. <br />The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were <br />duly noted. <br />Mr. Dale Gustafson, a representative for the applicant, was <br />present for this matter. <br />Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron <br />explained that the applicant was seeking approval to construct a <br />6* wide access/walkway through a wetland area partially in the 0- <br />75* lakeshore setback zone. Gaffron showed the Planning <br />Commission where the proposed walkway would be located. The 6* <br />width exceeds the 4* standard and would therefore require a 2* <br />variance in addition to a conditional use permit. The walkway <br />would consist of wood and wood posts that would extend <br />approximately 187'. <br />Chairman Kelley asked how the property owners currently <br />accessed the existing dock. Mr. Gustafson said that currently <br />the only way to access the dock is by using a neighboring <br />property. <br />Planning Commissioner Bellows inquired as to the hardship <br />for the 6* width as opposed to the standard 4*. Mr. Gustafson <br />explained that the 6* would offer more stability and would <br />provide more walking room and safety. <br />Gaffron questioned whether railings would be added to the <br />walkway in the future. Mr. Gustafson replied that the owner <br />would rather not install railings. Bellows asked why the walkway <br />did not continue all the way to the seasonal dock as opposed to <br />stopping at the little knoll? She believed there would be a risk <br />of the water level rising, making that area unpassable. Mr. <br />Gustafson stated that to the owner's knowledge, that area had <br />never been under water. Bellows questioned whether there were <br />any future plans to put a gazebo or storage shed in that spot? <br />Mr. Gustafson, replied that the owner had no such intentions. <br />There were no comments from the public regarding this matter <br />and the public hearing was closed. <br />It was moved by Planning Commissioner Brown, seconded by <br />Planning Commissioner Hanson, lo recommend approval of <br />application #1364, the hardship being the safety aspect of the ? <br />additional feet. Motion, Ayes«4, Nays-3 (Kelley, Bellows, <br />Cohen), Motion passed. <br />10