03/28/05 Regular - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Regular Meeting March 28, 2005 My phone number is 314-863-6181 and I do have a hand-out that I want to speak to. Mr. Mayor, while we are waiting, the reason I wrote out H A I R I G, is my brother and I were talking about this yesterday and there is no way people can get it right from the spelling, so . …. Mayor Adams: “That’s right . “I am sorry.” Mr. Harig: “My other observation .. being kind of hooked on these meetings, but I didn’t think I wanted the Mayor’s job and now I know I don’t want Mr. Ollendorff’s job. (Laughter). “Wow, it’s a tough one.” And Mr. Ollendorff: “Always fun.’” Mr. Harig: “What I’d like to do, and I will be brief, and I have set this handout up so that you can follow it with a minimum of reading, but I have given you a copy of th Frank B. Hill’s memo to the Plan Commission dated June 18, [2004]. I’m going to refer to that and the other handout listed AB-1, B-2, B-3, C and D are those paragraph th nomenclatures are marked in the margin of what I am going to speak to in the June 18 memo of Hill. And in addition to that, I’ve underlined the section I am going to speak to. So the first item I want you to take a look at is on the bottom of the first page with the number (sic) A in the right margin highlighted ‘the northern lot is A, vacant, land-locked piece of property which is not a lot of record.’ My comment on A is the northern lot is not a lot of record and therefore it should not be used to determine prevailing pattern. If this were the case, it would eliminate many of the lots Mr. Hill cites in his work-up. Simply stated, what’s happening here, there (are) two separate lots: the front lot, which is a lot of record, and the back lot. First of all, we want to combine these lots, then we want to slice them in two, and then we want to buy eighteen feet from the neighbor and then we want to use that new recipe as a frame of reference. I’m just saying, to me, if the lot is not a lot of record, it shouldn’t be used as a reference. “ Mr. Harig: “The second item refers to the Zoning Code and that’s in the margin B-1 and my comment is the Zoning Code calls for a set-back comparison of at least, at least, ten of the closest lots to the proposed subdivision. You can see from what is highlighted Mr. Hill cites only seven lots, five on Warder and two on Greensfelder and this appears to be a mistake on Mr. Hill’s work-up. And to be more specific, the ten closest lots to the proposed subdivision range in set-backs from approximately fifty feet at the deepest, which is the house next door to the proposed subdivision, down to twenty-seven which is the prevailing pattern, and then he cites prevailing the pattern as the lots on Warder and the specific lot of 7835 Greensfelder. Well, the lots on Warder are only five. The lot next door is six, lot number 7835 which I am going to talk about next, makes seven. It’s not going to ten . . . it says at least ten. And that then goes then to B-2 that I don’t have in the margin because it is not cited in the memo, but I will just point it out. The closest lots to Lot A of the subdivision, that’s the front lot, are different than the closest lots to Lot B of the subdivision, and this has Page 17