June 1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr Bide moved that the application for demolition be denied and that the NPC petition the Common Council for a one year delay in order to pursue the receivership program. The motion was seconded by • Mrs. Petrass. No further discission. The motion passed unanimousl 2. 1091 Riverside Drive -- Riverside Drive -LRD Mr. Nolycross read the staff report describing the proposed project: Install a sig foot wood, shadowbox -style fence at the rear of the property; to run from the southeast corner of the house west to the edge of slope, south to within approximately four feet of the alley, then turning at a 45 degree angle and running along the alley approximately another ten feet, then turning again at a 45 degree angle and continuing to the garage. The owner also wishes to remove a mature maple tree. The proposal was appropriate according to district standards and the staff recommended approval. Mr. Murphy, the owner, stated that the fence was for security as well as privacy. Mr. Nolycross stated that Mr. Murphy had received a zoning variance from the city for this project. Mr. Bide moved that the proposal be approved as submitted. Mrs. Choitz seconded the motion. No further discussion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Nolycross stated that the staff's opinion was that the addition as originally proposed was historically and aesthetically inappropriate. The current proposal was reached after the owners refused the suggestions of the staff; subsequently Mr. Bide and Mrs. Sporleder met with the owners; this proposal represents that collaborative effort. Staff recommended that all construction techniques and results be inspected in order to secure compliance with the agreement. Furthermore staff recommends that all outbuildings be retained. Mrs. Purkey explained her rationale for the proposed addition. Mr. Oxian stated he "cannot go along with anything in which you're going to end up taking down a chicken coop or anything else." Conversation ensued concerning the chicken coops. Mr. Bolycross read the landmark ordinance documenting the amount of acreage. Mr. Bolycross stated the staff's counter claim regarding the condition of the chicken coop. Mr. Bide detailed the meetings with the owners and the various advice and counsel given by the BPC to them gratis. Mr. Bide characterized the proposal as a "true compromise" though the end result "would not be our first choice". Mr. Bide moved that the proposal be approved subject to approval of materials and techniques for attaching the addition and that all outbuildings with the sole exception of the chicken coop that interferes with construction be retained. Mrs. Choitz asked for a reread of the motion. Conversation ensued concerning the wording of the 3. 63049 Turkey Trail -- Local County Landmark Mr. Nolycross read the staff report describing the proposed project: The owners wish to attach an addition to the rear of the main house; the addition would consist of a one-story gabled portion extending west, with a smaller gabled section running north, to be attached to a large, three -bay . garage. A deck is the "removal" of proposed to be located on the south a chicken coop and an outhouse that side of the addition. The proposal calls for stand in the path of the proposed addition. Mr. Nolycross stated that the staff's opinion was that the addition as originally proposed was historically and aesthetically inappropriate. The current proposal was reached after the owners refused the suggestions of the staff; subsequently Mr. Bide and Mrs. Sporleder met with the owners; this proposal represents that collaborative effort. Staff recommended that all construction techniques and results be inspected in order to secure compliance with the agreement. Furthermore staff recommends that all outbuildings be retained. Mrs. Purkey explained her rationale for the proposed addition. Mr. Oxian stated he "cannot go along with anything in which you're going to end up taking down a chicken coop or anything else." Conversation ensued concerning the chicken coops. Mr. Bolycross read the landmark ordinance documenting the amount of acreage. Mr. Bolycross stated the staff's counter claim regarding the condition of the chicken coop. Mr. Bide detailed the meetings with the owners and the various advice and counsel given by the BPC to them gratis. Mr. Bide characterized the proposal as a "true compromise" though the end result "would not be our first choice". Mr. Bide moved that the proposal be approved subject to approval of materials and techniques for attaching the addition and that all outbuildings with the sole exception of the chicken coop that interferes with construction be retained. Mrs. Choitz asked for a reread of the motion. Conversation ensued concerning the wording of the