Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Board of Adjustment 1987-04-17BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Board of Adjustment April 17, 1987 Board; Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Chairman Brown, Members Dickinson, Habecker, Lamson, Sager All Planner Stamey, Secretary Jones None TROUT POND, 510 MORAINE AVENUE. STRUCTURAL ALTERATION TO A NON- CONFORMING BUILDING --------------------------------------------- Mr. Thomas E. Suitts, partner in Catch Wild Trout Partnership, presented the request for a variance from Section 17.16.040, Sub. Para. F. Alteration. The owners wish to structurally alter a non-conforming building which has a setback of 3 ft. from the west side property line. The owners are proposing an addition to the existing building which will be used as a fee building. In original proposal the fee building was to be built closer to the lake but would have required cutting a large stand of mature trees. The new addition would comply with applicable setbacks. MemberMember Sager moved the variance request be approved. Dickinson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. flVENUE- REpt,EST ■F0R VARIANCE FR0M Siuesi1toa^?n«n;>,=rePreSe?ting the Petiti°ner, presented the his ?nt hS to construct a building at the rear of rimeStlM ab?n -5s aJ weldin9 shoP- The petitioner is thirjhi 9reqi?rl^ 25 ef?nd Ittl S;ndaC«f?r It" «bher effectively utilize the land. Mr. Richard Koester^1representing Lois Jones, adjacent property owner, was concerned about the size stated of vehicles, and noise. Mr. Van Horn t]?e.we;Ldlng would occur inside the building to keep enclosed inc!?HS;LmUra: , Ad^ltionally/ anY outdoor storage would be enclosed inside a sight impervious fence, as shown on the site Planner Stamey read a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Phil Switzer ?fi?fJnt4=Pr0pe^ty owners/ supporting the request and also a stated the? TOW? ?uilding Inspector, John Allman. Mr. Allman stated that exterior walls of one-hour fire resistent construction would be required in the building. resistant Member Sager moved the variance request be approved with a 15 ft side and rear setback rather than the requester 10 ft M^ber Habecker seconded the motion and it passed unanimously: