HomeMy WebLinkAbout1958-07-22; Planning Commission; Minutes. " - -
The maeiting wa8 called to order by Chairman Swirsky at ?:34 Po& Prosent besides the Chairman .were Commissioaers Fennel, Jamie, Baurngsrrtncr , Stringer and Ebright; also present was Secretary Price. Absentr, Commiesioner Hayes.
Minutes of Jung 24,. 1958, It, was moved by Comm, Jarvie and eeconded by Comm, #ringer me minutes of June 24, 1958 be approved as
submitted., All ayes, motion carr{ado
Minudes of July 8, 1958, If was moved by Comm. Ebright and seconded by Cornm. Fennel minuter of' July 8, 1958 be deferred until the next meeting in srder far the Commission Q reviuw $hem, AIL aye$, motion carried.,
Written Correspondence, The Secretary idormed the Commission there was no written corre~~pondaace ,
Orat Commun€cations. There were no oral communications.,
HEARING - Variance. of James A. Scanha fop variance oa
Notice of hearing wa8 re ~ecretary certitxed ae to the pubitcation of Notice of Hearing and the matling of notices to adjoining property ownera. There weke no written or oral protests. It wae moved by Camm. &bright and seconded by Comm. Fennel that Resolution No.. 77 be adopted granting a variance to h? applicant on the height of a side yard f4nce from 42 inches
to 72 inches, for the tollowing re aeon^^:
of sme .yamence from 4Z to 72 int=taeag
1, The fence does not become a traffic haerard due to the distance
tb The adjoining plloparty owners have registered no protests;
3, As thirs ia a by lot, or corner lot, the back yard ir abo a aide yard; and
4, The property near by ha8 a 60" fence instead of P 42" fenceo
Conddsrrbla discussion was given thf8 matter, The Chairma asked for '
a roil'call vote; Commissionere Fennel and Jarvie voted "yyd~~'; Commisaionars Baumgartner , Stringor, Ebright and Chairman Swiratry voted "110 'lo The
motion died for lack of a majorfty. Tha Chairman announced that due to a lack of majority on the previous motion a motion should be made &e.nying the variance.
from the corner;
It was moved by Comm., ,Ebr€ght and seconded by Comm. Striugrer that Res,, #77 be a,dopted denying the variance as raquoated for the following
reasons;
as it would be setting a precede& that would involve a great harm or problem;
undue hardship to the owner; and
not have been made;
2. The nature of fbe fence will allow its proper location w€thout
3, If a building permit had been taken out that this error would
The Chairman pointed out that the baaic purpose of granting variances is not to clarify rnieibkes made by property owners. He reviewed the four conditions by which a variance-could be granted according to Ordinance No.
9060.
After considerable discussion by tbe Commission the Chairman asked for
a roll call vote. Commissioners Fennel and Jarvie voted %ol', Commie- sionere Baumgartner , Stringer, Ebright and Chairman Swirsky voted *lyes1l0 The motion died for iack of 8 majority.
In order to evolve this matter Comm. Baurngartner moved that this matter be continued until the next meeting of August 12, 1958 . Seconded by Cornm Ebright. All ayes motion carried. The Chairman announced that i% would be more than 20 days befae the next regular meeting, and according
to Article 18, Section 1809 the Commission must announce its findings by formal resolujion.
Comm. Stringzr moved that the previous motion bo rescinded and the matter be continued until later in the evening, Seconded by Comn;. Ebright, ALL @pa, motion carried.
HEARING - Variance - Mndinger and Ostrye. Request Lor reduction in lot stze from 6, uuu equare'teet to 5,737335 sq, M, , ~ot 6mock TB~~ of Anis Avocado Acres Exceps the southeasterly 22,03 feet, Notice of Rearing waa read. The Secretary certiffed as to the pubiication of Notice of Hearing and as to the mailing of notices to the surrounding property ownerao The Cornmission requested the recorda show that thitl property
€a located in an R -2 Zone,
Comm. Fennel moved that Resolution No. 77 be adopted granting a variance
to the applicant8 as requested for the following reasons:
l. Like cirmmstancee prevail in the neighborhood; and 2. It would not be detrimental to the surrounding propertice.
Seconded by Comm. Jarvie. Comm. Jarvie tatated that he hoped tbt some day there would be an atley running .through the back of this property. After conaiderable discussion by the Comrnission, the Chairman requested a roll call vote. Six ayes, Resolution No, 77 adopted. Comm. Ebright stated he voted "aye" upon the condition that the building does not vary from any of the conditions in Ordinance No. 9060 in regards to set backs,
Civic Canter - Recommendation on Master Plan. The Chairman reviewed the previous bqqxningr on3is matters wherein the various commissions
and the Woman's Club were to present their recommendations to the Planning Commission, and they in turn would submit these recommendations along with their recommendation to the Courmcil. Recommendatiom were presented f~om the Library Commission and the Parks and Recreation
Commbafon, Also the signed contract between the City and the Woman9s Club was presented, Comrn. Ebright moved that a letter be sent to the Council enclosing these recomrnendationa, and stating that after due consideration by the Planning Commissioa, the Planning Commission recommends the adoption of a Civic Center Plan in accordance with the revised Civic Center Plan a8 submitted by Mr. Hatch, Seconded by Cornm, Fennel. All ayes, motion carried.
80 Report from VJhikn;rlL oa request of Mrs, 3onnia Thampson to change Gdinance Nom60 to permit day nurseries tn an R-l Zone. The Secretary fnforrned the Commisaion that Mr-11 had not submlned a written repmt, but had informed him today that he had checked into this matter and these schools are regulated very strictly and thoroughly by the Sate1 and historically where requests similar to Mrs. Thompson kve been granted, they had resulted in difficulties arising in the City; due to the control by tho Sate, that once the governing body permits the use in an Re1 wne, that it in effect relinquishes the control to another agency, The result8 have not been eatisfactory where requesta such as this have been granted.
Mrs.. Thompson was present Eud read a latter wherein she rcqueatad a change ob Ordinance No. 9060 to allow nursery schools in an R-I Zone; Letter from Perry Lamb was read stating he had bmn sending ?air children
to this nurrcry echool for the past year , and requested the soning ordinance bo changed to allow this nursery achool. Letter from Mrs. Ed Kaminski requesting that tho zoning ordinance be changed to allow this nursery schoo1, and steting th€s business is one that cannot be moved as it is carried on in the home.
It was pointed out that the zoning ordinance does allow day nurseries in an R-2 eone, allowing 9 chiidren. After considerable discussion by the Com- mission Coma>. Jarvia moved that a Resolution of Intention bs adopted, amendin Ordinance No. 9060 to allow a day nursery in an Re1 zone, setting t % e time and place for hearing, in accordance with Section 604 of Ordinance No, 9060. The motion died for lack of a second,
Comm. Baumgartner stated the Commission should not consider juat this nursery schoot; he was disappointed that Mr. Whitnall hail not submitted a written report, and would like to request Mr, Whitnall to submit a written report.
Comm, Jar* moved that Article 14, ot Ordinance No. 9060 be amended to aUow day nursdriee in an R-1 sou? upon the basis of a Conditional Use Permit, The motion died for iack of a aeconda Comm. axinger stated that if any consideration ia g€vm to this matter it soutd be done by way of a conditSona1 use permit, and the matter shoultt be given to a study committee, If a change were made it should be for nurseries and not for juat a nursery.
Comm. Baumgartner moved tbat the Secretary be instructed to request a written report from Mr. Whitnall, to include the foltowing points:
L. Why it should nd be allowed in an R-1 Zone; 2. The poseiblity of aLLowing nurseries by the use of a Conditional
3, That if a Conditional Use Permit is used that distance of side
Use Permit; and
yard and rear yard be considered.
Seconded by Comm, Stringer. All ayes , motion carried.
9- The Chairman requested that items (9), 00) and (1 1) on thc age- be deferred until the nBxt meeting.
lo* HEARING 4 Variance - Scanlon - (Continu Mr. ScanLon advised the commission that due to conditions lieyond control he was unable to be here'at the time of the hesbrirtg. COG. Baumgartner moved that the Public Hearing be reopened to conaidsr the hearing on a variance requested by Mr, Scanlon. Seconded by Comrn, Fennel, All ayee, motion carriedo
MR. SCANLCN, informed the Commissiori he appreciated the Gommtssion reopening the hearing. If this fence was detrimental t.0 any of the surround- ing properties he would not ask for this variancer He had reviewed tht zoning ordinance. There was no Merit on his part to violate the ordinance, He felt the fence added to fbe value of the property; the next door neighbor
was the first one to ve his approval of the fence; the other people in the area approve af the f ence; there is 32 feet of clear dew; he could not find out who bad made ais protest, and felt the party should have appeared at this meeting to make the protest.
Comm, 3arvia arrked if there was a legal building site weat of the fence. The applicant stated he did not feet that a house could &e built on tbe
' !?ropcrtY.
The public hearing was C10Sed at 9:30 P.M.
Comm. Stringer asked if they deaied the applicatton could they oncrb a condition to allow Mr. Scadon one year in which to remove this fence, The Chairman felt they could not put a restriction in a motton of this type.
Comm. Jarvie moved that Rcso1ution #78 be adopted granting $he variance a8 rcqueatsd dub to the foilowing rea8ons:
1. The fence has been in existence for ane pear;
2. The neighboring property owners registered no protests; 3. Thsri.s were no oral or written protests; and
subjact to-the fouowing condition:
c
1. It ever the adjoining property mer desirea fa build on the front of his property that the applicant would remove tM8 fence,
and the applicant submit in writing hie willingness io remove this fence under this conditioa,
The motion died for lack of a second, Cornm. Stringer pointed out that if this variance were granted the fence becomes a legal fence. After considerable discussion, Cosnm, Ebright moved that the public hearing be reopened. Seconded by Comm, Stringer, All ayes, motion carried,
Comm, Ebright moved that the heartng bo continued until August 26, 1958, Seconded by Comm, Baumgarker. All ayes, motion carried, Mr, Scanlon
was infowrmd that the hearing was reopened and continued until August 26, 3958, and he could present any testimony at that time,
4-
110 Adjournment. By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 1O:OO P,M.
-5-