Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />City Council Minutes <br />November 15? 1982 <br />Page Two <br /> <br />Commission hold a workshop session regarding variances. The City Administrator <br />indicated that he recommended approval oLthe variance because of the following <br />reasons: <br /> <br />1. It would be a hardship as it would be difficult for Mr. Boyd to expand <br />another direction because of the layout of his operation. <br /> <br />2. The old City ordinance required a 35 foot setback which would allow for <br />the expansion of the cabinet shop to the front of the business and that <br />the new ordinance has increased that setback requirement to 50 feet. <br /> <br />3. The addition would not extend beyond the front of the house located on <br />the property. <br /> <br />4. The setting of a precedent would not be a problem as it is a simple case <br />and would not cause damage or problems, should a similar case be present- <br />ed to the City Council. <br /> <br />General discussion was carried on regarding the drainage problems in the area of <br />the railroad track and Proctor Avenue. <br /> <br />Councilman Duitsman indicated that he was in favor of the approval of the variance <br />request and further questioned the City's possibility of recourse against the rail- <br />road for the6isturbing of the water drainage in the area. <br /> <br />The City Administrator indicated that the City may have recourse against the <br />railroad tracks as the law says natural drainage should not be disturbed. Mr. <br />George Boyd indicated that he has been at his present location nine years and <br />the water has always backed up at the railroad tracks. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN DUITSMAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A FRONT YARD SETBACK <br />BY MR. GEORGE BOYD AT 709 PROCTOR AVENUE. COUNCILMAN ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. <br />THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. <br /> <br />6. Sewer Hookup Assessments - Public Hearing <br /> <br />The City Administrator indicated that the City Council agreed to assess the $1,000 <br />sewer hookup charge to those properties for which the owners requested the hookup <br />charge to be placed on their taxes. The City Administrator further indicated that <br />the public hearing is required to assess costs to property owners and further in- <br />dicated that the property owners have been notified of the proposed assessment. <br />The City Administrator further indicated that State Statute does not allow for in- <br />terest charge on unpaid or amoritzed connection charges. <br /> <br />Mayor Hinkle opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Discussion was carried on as to the number of years the assessment was spread. <br />