My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
VN-243
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
PLANNING
>
Planning
>
Variance Files PLZ 02400
>
VN 201-300
>
VN-243
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2007 2:25:15 PM
Creation date
3/13/2007 1:09:13 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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
Planning Commission <br />Regular Meeting <br />December 205 1984 <br />Page 3 <br />Public Hearings_ <br />8:00 P.M.- <br />8:23 P.M. <br />Thermo King, VN-241 <br />Staff explained how the fence came to be located in it's <br />present position and she recommended denial of the variance <br />request per the findings of fact in the sample resolution. <br />John Jorissen of Thermo King questioned the lack of unique <br />circumstances especially with the singleefamilyshomesof High- <br />adjacent to the property. <br />way #96 do not conform to the setbacks now and therefore <br />Thermo King's fence does not stick out. QuestioneW1?ha20other <br />ways there are to protect the well and well pump <br />motor). There are no simple ways to protect pump except by <br />fencing it. There is ko ninandtstorageuandtthisearea couldibe <br />the front yard for parking <br />curbed off to prevent parking. Their concern is for the safety <br />of the neighbors. Tfence is noteoffensive looking and was <br />there when the property was Chairman Williams asked if the fence is in the same place now <br />as it was prior to construction. <br />Mr. Jorrissen responded it is except across the front of the <br />building. <br />Chairman Williams asked if the fence should be permitted because <br />it was reestablished in the same location as when the applicant <br />purchased the property. <br />Commissioner Baker stated <br />roved planstforftheedelocation velopmentaofnthecsite. <br />sistent with the app <br />Motion by Baker, seconded by Livingston to close the public <br />hearing. <br />5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion carried. <br />Commissioner Baker stated he had a concern for granting the ose <br />variance because <br />dren 311 foot <br />out, thatnthewnewdcoserve th nstructionaoftThermo King <br />of keeping g children <br />is an opportunity for the standards dbe dsecuredewiarea thoutoabfence and that <br />the pump is not unique and
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.