My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/11/1980 Board of Public Works Minutes
sbend
>
Public
>
Public Works
>
Minutes
>
1980
>
02/11/1980 Board of Public Works Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/24/2011 4:14:55 PM
Creation date
11/24/2010 4:35:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board of Public Works
Document Type
Minutes
Document Date
2/11/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
LIAPAM <br />REGULAR MEETING <br />FEBRUARY 11, 1950 <br />asked her if she had any drawings or sketches of the proposed <br />improvements. Ms. Bridges submitted to the Board the contract <br />for the foundation work and indicated that a plot plan had been <br />submitted. Mr. Kernan asked if the area was considered a <br />subdivision and wondered if there were any codes specific to <br />that area which would have to be complied with. The resident <br />of 212 South Dundee indicated that she was not sure of any <br />restrictions. She indicated that, in the beginning, all the <br />homes were required to be built within a two -year period and <br />had to be new homes. Mr. Walz indicated that this had been a <br />restriction made by the Redevelopment Department. Ms. Bridges <br />indicated that, as far as she was aware, there were no restric- <br />tions other than the front, side and rear setback requirements <br />which she intended to comply with. Mrs. Blake indicated that <br />when the homes were originally built, Redevelopment had been <br />very strict about the area. Mr. Walz stated that, if the move <br />was granted subject to certain conditions, he wondered how the <br />Board could foresee what might happen if the conditions were not <br />met. He felt that, if that happened, it would be too late for <br />the residents to do anything about it since the house would have <br />already been moved. Mr. Hill indicated that the ordinance dealing <br />with house moves was fairly broad in terms of the public interest. <br />He stated that, if someone bought a property or lot, it would be a <br />matter of zoning, and he did not feel the Board would put a <br />property owner in a different situation because the house was <br />not a new one. He stated that the home would have a brick front <br />which would be comparable to the other homes in the area, and the <br />square footage would be increased. He questioned how the steps <br />could be taken to assure that the home, when completed, would <br />enhance the other homes. <br />Deputy City Attorney Terry Crone suggested that the Board could <br />approve the move subject to a site plan. Mr. Hill felt the <br />concerns of the residents were valid, but he was also concerned <br />about setting a precedent where a neighborhood could almost have <br />a veto power on what went in the neighborhood. Mr. Walt wondered <br />what sort of criteria the Board would consider if the move was <br />granted subject to the compliance of certain conditions. 11'r. <br />Hill indicated that the Board of Public Works must be concerned <br />about the effect the move would have on traffic lights and utility <br />lines, the watermains and the streets over which the structure <br />would be moved, and how this move would be accomplished without <br />physical damage to public property. He indicated that the Board <br />was being asked to consider square footage and property values. <br />He felt this was reasonable, but he wondered how far the Board <br />should go on that matter. Mr. Walz stated that, if the home <br />was a ranch - style, it would be more compatible to the other homes. <br />He stated that the residents' concerns fell within the general <br />well being of the neighborhood. Ms. Bridges stated that, if that <br />was the case, she probably would be permitted to build a bungalow <br />since it would be new construction, but the present structure would <br />not comply since it was not a new home. Mr. Kernan expressed his <br />concern for the residents and their neighborhood. He felt the <br />neighbors were to be commended for their homes and he stated that <br />he was concerned about the square footage of the home and how it <br />could compare to the other homes. His second concern was how <br />the home would fit into the neighborhood and how the home would <br />comply with the standards set by the neighborhood. He indicated <br />that Ms. Bridges has expressed an intent to do things to make <br />the home compatible to the other homes. He was concerned, as <br />Mr. Hill had indicated, about the Board dealing with what types <br />of homes could go into a certain neighborhood. He stated that, <br />if the home was completely incompatible, he would not hesitate <br />as to what exactly would be done with the home if moved, spelling <br />out in detail how it would be set, where the garage would be, the <br />type of landscaping, etc. He made a motion to approve the move <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.