Laserfiche WebLink
._ <br />a _ ; <br />VN-121 - 2 -- June- 11,.1974 <br />from the west and will have no w~ew at all in that- <br />direction, <br />PLI~NNING COMMISSION.CONSIDER~TION (May-'21, 1974}s <br />Thee Chairman read the background `discussion. ~ , <br />,Mrs.-; Charles `Bergman ;appeared to speak in his'"own behalf. ti <br />` "~Ie stated that..a chain link fence would surroud the con- <br />Crete pad and hat the..grades on the. property are what <br />they ars because there is a pipeline running under'the <br />property. He also stated-that he bought the house. on he., \~ <br />conditionthat the pad Abe constructed,- that. he doesn't. <br />:know whether a permit was taken out for thepad and that <br />he didn`t know'at that time that he couldn't put up a <br />fence. <br />In response o a question by;Parham„as to how his request <br />_met the three .conditions-for,a variance, Mr. Bergman <br />stated that the pad would'beused as~a_play area as well <br />as tennis and basketball court. He stated that~the fence <br />would keep kids in a safe `enclosure so they weren't <br />p running: into-thestreet chasing balls and that if one of <br />the kids were. hit .by a car, it :would be undue hardship, <br />PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (May 21L 1974): _ <br />Motion by Bohling, seconded by Harty, to recommend approval <br />of`VN-I21 with the condition that no opaque-material ever <br />be installed on the fence to obstruct-the view and that <br />clYairi link,-fencing should be the .only type of material <br />allowed. <br />Chairman Parham reiterated her concern-that the existence of <br />the. pad could not justify the variance because it could serve <br />as a convenient technique to circumvent the Iaw., <br />Motion carried, 3-0. <br />