Laserfiche WebLink
4. <br />n'-t!lSk l0': " i l P%r, II! 1.11 ","(11 ?l, 1977 <br />n•c 1 i, 4 a.,.r 5 a..i+rovvd :IS clh,ritt('d. <br />+nwcd�l of F �� a •.� .:prate pars �1 nn t!,c condition that <br />V: reed until laps for a septic <br />nn `+uildinF 1.cT-^it i.._ p <br />n 11"l^ aril replace-r_nt are approved by the City 1.nFin�er. <br />6^1+inition of Lots 1+ and with the Ir.uderstandinr, that <br />this lot could be split at a future date provided the <br />septic s>'stcn ret the approval of the City 1-.ngineer. <br />Appropriate Park rlc,i icat ion ree. <br />t►mlcrlying czscrrnt on road and c,ul plc c:rc and extension <br />of mac'aZy beyond cul-dc-sac. <br />utility casement on Willow and alcutr Private mod. <br />^rainage caccrrnt aryl drainarc plan as ,rl+pro�'vd by City <br />1'ngineer. <br />�htion - A�•es (S), 'gays ;0). (`lcnher Pc,56 left during the <br />discussion of this item and was not present for the rkaion.) <br />Tire �oning A(>-rinistrator ^.ode the applicant a.:arc t'rat a <br />title oiinion addressed to the city ,nuld lie ncccrcary for <br />final approval. <br />Applicant .:as not present. ,everal interested property <br />c•,mers were in attenflance; Donald `'na-s, Howard Soot and <br />Stanley Cirspinski. The Zoning A,Lninistrator explained <br />that the applicant is ml►uesting al,pro%al to operate a <br />l.ennel near the intersection of liiglrwav 12 and County <br />Road 6. This facility would he used for the boarding of <br />small dogs. <br />Approval of this application would require retaiing due <br />to the fact that this proposed operation is in a resi- <br />dential zone. Although the Cortmission felt that this <br />proposed deserved some consideration, they were not in <br />favor of anv rezoning at this time. <br />The Zoning Administrator stated that he had consulted <br />with the City Attorney as instr►ctexl for his direction <br />cMv..eming our ordinance on stock farm in relation to <br />this application. ile advised that there is no way to <br />approve this request on the basis of a club or stock <br />farts as this is definitely a cormerc:al venture. <br />rWlap moved klcilmald seconded, to deny this apl,lica- <br />tion based on the recorrentiation of the City Attorney. <br />motion - Ayes (S). 'gays (0). <br />%l., ridden wrs present. Applicant is requesting approval <br />for an addition to the east and north side of the existing <br />The addition nlong the east end of the house would <br />he 11 feet frm the lot line with the extcnde•d deck appmxi- <br />n,t.ly 10, from the lot line. <br />Rip, rlanning Comissinn was concerned about the <br />ri,,ate ea —rent providing ncceA% to the lakeshore lot. <br />ev fo-1t the proposed addition would conflict with this <br />F , % �+rrrt . They suggested that the applicant contact the <br />J'..%( : 2 <br />1c11.1.1 \`+ p. 1,n-FRING <br />(+ on i Hued) <br />(P.'=3) <br />"!. i:A•illI ELLIS <br />3740 w0:ATA B(>t UYARD <br />M':D1TIMAL USE M.R11IT <br />(0236) <br />MUM OD" <br />34SO Omni 9t(`RE PRIVE <br />LCT ARrA 6 W I 17i1 l VAR I A KI <br />/pRO}'OSi D ADDITiQV IQ ggING <br />IM <br />(t237) <br />