My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
VN-177
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
PLANNING
>
Planning
>
Variance Files PLZ 02400
>
VN 101-200
>
VN-177
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2007 4:10:03 PM
Creation date
2/26/2007 1:11:44 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
93
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
Page 2. <br />VN-177 <br />for the location of the homes adjacent to the parking lot and <br />would suggest that appropriate landscaping/screening be provi.de.d. <br />This could be handled as a form of deed restriction similar to <br />other situations that have recently been processed. A third <br />concern is snow storage given the smaller than normal boulevard <br />area. We would suggest that up to -a 5 foot snow storage ease- <br />ment be provided, beyond the existing boulevard. <br />As a summary, we would note the applicant's statements <br />that the variance is needed as a result of the existing develop- <br />ment and their desire to sell excess property. We have concerns <br />for drainage, screening and snow storage. <br />Planning Commission Consideration and Recommendation(11/15/77) <br />VN-177 Faith Christian Reformed Church <br />The Director of Community Development noted that this item had <br />been continued from the previous meeting and that no new infor- <br />mation was provided <br />Commissioner Doyle stated that at the last meeting the Planning <br />Commission had looked at the possibility of an enlarged cul-ce <br />sac and the possibility of combining driveways to the two <br />proposed lots but that neither action seemed feasible, <br />Henry Breems and Ward Stienstra appeared representing the <br />applicant, <br />Commissioner Wickland asked why the combined driveways would <br />not be feasible, <br />Mr. Breems stated that combining the driveways was feasible. <br />Commissioner Medved asked how the combined driveway would be <br />implemented <br />The Director of Community Development stated that this could be <br />done as a deed restriction requiring use of a-combined driveway <br />and that this method has-been used in other cases that were similar <br />in nature. He stated that there: was the added complication in this <br />case of need for joint maintenance of the driveway.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.