|
<br />E ~1.j1,
<br />V.l'.
<br />e
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />I 0 COMMI TTEE or THE WHOLE I
<br />I. DISCUSSION REGARDING GROUND WATER PROBLEM IN VICINITY OF 26,TH AVENUE AND I .
<br />ONYX ST~EET - COUNClkMA~ LAURIS INDICATEb THAT MR. E~ F.. RAMSEIER OF 2620
<br />~, :'€MERALD STREET AND MR. RAL,PH MAR'TI N OF ,2635 ONYX STREET HAD I NDI CATED TO HER
<br />THAT THE SOlL IN THEIR BACK YARpS WAS OVER SAWURATED WITH WATER, APPARENTLY
<br />RISINi FROM THE GROUND. AT T~IS LOCATION. IT WAS. INDICATED THAT IB ONE CASE
<br />CONSIDERABLE MOISTURE DAMAGE HAD BEEN DONE TO A HOME AND IN ANOTHER CASE '
<br />. I
<br />POOLS AND MARSHY PLACES WERE CREATED BY SUCH WATER AND WERE A BREEDING PLACE j
<br />FOR MOSQUITOES AND OTHER INSECTS~ THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WO~KS, INDICATED I
<br />THAT, IN THE PAST THEY HAD'CONDUCTED TEST BORINGS IN THE AREA IN AN ATTEMPT !
<br />I , '. .
<br />TO DETERMINE THE SOURCE OF THE WATER AND THAT IN HIS OPINION THE CITY HAD NO
<br />1 : '. '.
<br />LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY TO INDIVIDUALS AS IT WAS FELT THE WATER WAS A
<br />NATURA( OCCURENCEAT THESE PLACES. IT WAS ALSO POINTED OUT THA~ riTH~R RESI- I
<br />DENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS IN' THI S SAME AREA HAD FOUND I T NECESSARY TO TI LE I;
<br />THEIR PROPERTIES TO RELI~vi EQUIVALENT S~TUATIONS. iT WAS THE CONSENSUS OF
<br />OPINION OF THE COMMITT~E THAT THE'CITY HAD NO~ES~b~SIB~LITY WITH RESPECT i
<br />TO TH I S PROBLEM. No FORMAL AC'TI ON' WAS TAKEN. " , , _
<br />
<br />I
<br />2. PROPOSED, AMENDMENT TO THE BUILDING CODE- COUNCILMAN LAURIS REFE~RED ~ACK ;
<br />TO PREVIOUS' :ACTI ON OF. THE, COUNCI L' WHI ci{ W.OULD REQUI RE' THE COUNTY 'TO APPL-Y :
<br />FOR A BUILDI~G PERMIT F~b~ TH~'CIT~ FOR' THE ~ONSTR~ci)~N OF TH~ NE~ CbUNTY I
<br />. .." , . t
<br />COURTHOUSE AND TO. PA~ THE FEE FOR ~UCH A PERMIT. IT WAS HER THOUGHT THAT :
<br />THE FEES FOR SUCH A. BUI LDI NG "SHOULD BE )tIAI VED. THE CI'TnATTORiNEY EXPLAI NED I
<br />THAi HE HAD SENT INQ~IRIES TO T~REE OTH~R CITIES IN WHICH NEW COUN~Y COURT-
<br />HOUSES ~AD RECENTLY BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND THAT IN ONE CASE THE COpNTY HAD i
<br />PAID FOR A ~UILD~NG PERMIT~ IN ONE CASE THEY WERE EXEMPTE~ BY ORDINANCE,
<br />AND I N ONE CASE TH'E ORDI NANCE WAS OVERLOOKED.
<br />
<br />,
<br />,
<br />THERE WAS GENERAL DISCUSSION AMONG REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMMITTEE AND
<br />VARIOUS IDEAS EXPRESSED AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF EXEMPTING OR NOT EXEMPTING
<br />THE COUNTY FROM THE. PAYMENT OF. A BU,I LDI NG PERMI T FEE. AMONG THE SUGGESTIONS
<br />MADE WERE THESE: (A) THAT NO PERMIT' BE REQUIRED AND .THATNO SERVICES' BE
<br />RENDERED; (8) THAT NO PERMI T BE REQUI RED BUT TH~T THE' NORM'Al I NSpECTI ON SER-
<br />VICES BE RENDERED; (C) THAT SUCH SERVICES A~ WERE NEEDED BE RENDER~D AT COST.
<br />
<br />I TWAS SUGGEST"EDTHAT BEFORE ANY ACTI O,N. I S TAKEN TO SPECI FI CA~LY EXEM~T ALL Ii
<br />OR ANY PORTI ON OF THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT, A DETERMI NATION SHOULD BE MADE AS I:
<br />TO HOW FAR REACHI NG THE EXEMPTI ON WOULD BE ALLOWED. I T WAS RECOMMENDED THE I:
<br />ITEM BE REFERRED, TO THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR INVESTIGATION AND REPORT BACK TO I
<br />t '
<br />THE COUNCIL." :
<br />
<br />IT WAS MOVED BY MR. WATSON SECONDED BY MR. BRIGGS THAT THE COMMITTEE REPORTS BE ADOPTED. I~
<br />MOTION CARRIED. .
<br />
<br />REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
<br />
<br />12 A REPORT OF THE BOARD. OF ApPEALS MEETING I-!ELD ON AUGus'T. 14,1957 - R.E: VARIOUS REQUESTS FOR I
<br />VARIANCES WAS SUBMITTED AND READ AS FOLLOWS:
<br />t
<br />"THE BOARD OF ApPEALS. HELD A ME~TING A~- THE CIJY HALL A~GUST 14, 1957.
<br />MEMBERS PRESENT WERE MR. HENDERSHOTT, MR. MORRIS AND MR.. MOYER.
<br />
<br />I. MR. DREXEL THRAPP', 2370 MISSION BLVD.~ REQUESTS A' ,VAR'IANCE IN, LAND, USAGE
<br />TO CONSTRUCT A DUPLEX ON' A LOT 80' X 150'" AT 1405 JEFFERSON STREET. IT
<br />WAS EXPLAI NED TO MEMBERS' OF THE BOARD THAT A BUI LOI NG, PERMi T HAD. BEEN ISSUED
<br />BY THE BUI LDI NG DEPT. AND AT A LATER DATE FOUND IT, TO BE IN VIOlATI,ON OF THE _
<br />ZONING ORDIN~NCE. MEMBERS WERE ALSO TAKEN TO THE BUILDING SITE. AFTER VIEW-
<br />ING THE,LOCATION, AND EXISTlNG,BUILDINGS IN THE. NEIGHBORHOOD IT WAS AGREED
<br />UPON BY ALL MEMBERS OF T~E BOARD THAT THE STRUCTURE WOULD. BOT BE DETRIMENTAL
<br />TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ~ND THAT, THE MATTER BE REFERRE~ TO THE CITy,COUNCI~ FOR
<br />THE I R ACTI ON.
<br />
<br />2. MR. ROBERT. HELLI NG, 29.78 HI GH STREET, REQUESTS A VARI ANCE I N FRONT PROPERTY
<br />LINE TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE WHICH WOULD NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE PRESENT SET
<br />BACK OF THE RESIDENCE NOW UNDER CONSTRUCTI ON AT 225 EAST 29TH PLACE.' AFTER I'
<br />VIEWING THE PLOT PLAN AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE TRIANGULAR SHAPED '
<br />LOT, MR. HENDERSHOTT MADE'A MOTION THAT THE REQUEST BE GRANTED~ MR. MORRIS
<br />SECONDED, MO:rJONCARRIED. .",-- ..
<br />
<br />3. MR. WALTER DENNIS,1633 FRANKL~N BLVD., HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE FROM THE 25'
<br />SET BACK FOR STRUCTURES ON FRANKLI N BLVD. TO' ERECT A SI GN AT THE SAME AD- I; I
<br />DRESS. MR. MORRIS MADE A MOTION AND MR. HENDERSHOTT SECONDED THAT THE
<br />MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. !
<br />
<br />4. MR. ROY N. STANDLEY, 2515 ONYX STREET, REQ~ESTS A VARIANCE FROM THE 20' SET
<br />BACK FOR' GARAGES TO ENLARGE HIS GARAGE 9' FROM THE CURB LI~E. AFTER VIEWING ~
<br />THE DRAWING .AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE LoCATION OF THE, EXISTING GARAGE
<br />IN RELATION TO ONYX STREET, MR. HENDERSHOTT MADE, A MOTION AND MR.' MOYER SECONDED'
<br />THAT THE REQUEST BE GRANTED. ALL MEMBERS WERE IN FAVOR. i
<br />
<br />I e
<br />~
<br />
|