Laserfiche WebLink
<br />were requiring screening of vehicles from the neighbors but he did not know if it was still a <br />requirement in the ordinance. He stated he now lives on the west side with ten acres and is now <br />able to build a pole barn but he cannot afford it because he is on a fixed income. He stated some <br />of his neighbors are limited to the size of building they can put their cars in. He stated he saw <br />this as a hardship to many people. He stated he has a problem with the ordinance where people <br />are basing their lives on putting things on an approved surface. He stated he has a problem with <br />this ordinance and he also had a problem with the burden of proof and it should be on the City. <br />If the City has a problem with what a property owner is doing or is out of line with the ordinance, <br />they should be required to find a burden of proof and it should be assumed that the resident is in <br />compliance until proven not to be. He hoped they would leave the ordinance as is. <br /> <br />Mr. Bill Salter, 5919 17ih Lane, stated he understood they need an ordinance for vehicles and <br />trash but he thought they should be specific on what they are looking for. He stated if the <br />ordinance is passed, he will be way over the limit. He strongly believed they needed something <br />for trash automobiles but not for recreational toys. <br /> <br />Mr. Joe Sargent, 153rd Lane NW, stated he has a couple of neighbors that have abused the <br />ordinance. He stated he is tired about his neighbor running down his property value because of <br />the way it looks and felt the City needed this type of amendment. <br /> <br />Mr. Bob Tomaszewski, 17220 Tiger, stated going back to the burden of proof and going back to <br />having only one vehicle for each licensed driver in the house, he wondered how will it be proved <br />who is living at the residence or not and he thought this would need to be decided in a court. He <br />thought this was an invasion of privacy. <br /> <br />Mr. Wayne Grover, 7040 147th Avenue, stated he lived on Sunfish and every time he goes out of <br />his front door he sees his neighbor's trailer that has never been moved in 3.5 years. He stated he <br />'called the City on this and was told there is nothing they can do about it. He stated the neighbor <br />uses the trailer for junk and he stated there is nothing in the ordinance regarding trailers and he <br />thought there should be something in the amendment regarding storing trailers in the front yard. <br />He did not think he should have to look at something like this every day and he felt that they do <br />need an ordinance to regulate this someway otherwise it will get out of hand. <br /> <br />Motion by Chairperson Nixt, seconded by Commissioner Cleveland, to close the public hearing. <br /> <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Cleveland, Brauer, Hunt, <br />Levine, Trites Rolle, and Van Scoy. Voting No: None. Absent: None. <br /> <br />The public hearing closed at 9:12 p.m. <br /> <br />Commission Business <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission back to order at 9:12 <br />p.m. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/September 6, 2007 <br />Page 12 of 15 <br />