My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
VN-117
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
PLANNING
>
Planning
>
Variance Files PLZ 02400
>
VN 101-200
>
VN-117
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2007 5:47:41 PM
Creation date
2/20/2007 3:48:16 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />VN-117 - 2 - April 23, 1974 <br />yard parking as covered in Cahpter XII. <br />Daniels noted that this is a very exposed area and asked if putting <br />screening strips in the fence were being considered. <br />Mr. Nolan stated that their major concern was to hold down costs since <br />this was only an interim development. <br />`P~3~anninq Commission Recommendation (March 19, 1974)_: <br />notion by Daniels to recommend approval of VN-117 with the comment <br />that the p~:titioner wishes to use his front yard for open storage and <br />that this is not parking in the normal ;tense of the word. <br />Motion withdrawn, <br />Motion by D-niels to recommend approval of VN-117 with the following <br />conditions: <br />1. The landscape and plot plan for the original development of this <br />parcel be revised to show the requested addition, together with <br />the proposed landscaping for the entire parcel. <br />2, That the petitioner be required to supply slatting in the proposed <br />fence or a screening landscape treatment so as to screen all four <br />sides o~ the contents of the proposed open air storage. <br />Motion failed for lack of a second, <br />Motion by Bohling, seconded by Parham, to recommend approval of VN-117 <br />but to recommend that the need for a variance be reviewed and that if <br />it is found appropriate to then recommend instead that the change <br />proposed be handled by an amendment to the landscape and plot plan for <br />the parcel showing landscaping, fencing and lighting, and that the <br />site development conform to City codes in all respects. <br />Motion failed, 1-2 (Daniels, Parham) <br />Motion by Parham, seconded by Bohling, to recommend approval of~•.-:~N-117 <br />on the condition that an amended landscape and plot plan for the <br />parcel be submitted for review by the Planning Commission prior to the <br />public hearing. <br />Motion carried, 3-0 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.