PCMin_89Nov6 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 6, 1989 PAGE 3 Boche to again lay the item over. After a vote was taken, the following voted in favor thereof: Finegan and Boche, and the following voted against the same: Barryr Black, Daykin, Duncan, and Critter. Motion failed. Then Finegan moved, seconded by Grittner to approve the idea of exempting attached garages in R-1 Zones from the requirement in Section 9-2.04, Subdivision 1(f). Motion carried unanimously. Grittner was of the opinion that the size of an attached garage located in the front of the house should be limited to 50 percent of the front footage of the home. Staff was directed to further research the issue and present further data and recommendations to the Commission. A second contradictory definition of accessory structure was clarified. Daykin moved, seconded by Finegan, to delete the words "and this Code" from Section 9-2.04, Subdivision 1(b) of the Zoning Code. The motion carried unanimously. AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 5-14.04 OF THE CITY CODE TO CHARGE A RECORDING FEE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, VARIANCES AND REZONING INITIATED BY PROPERTY OWNERS • Planner Susan Hoyt Taff reviewed the fee schedule in Section 5-14.04 and suggested that charges be added for the recording of variances and conditional use permmits on parcels of land so that the the State is assured that the City is fulfilling its statutory obligations; it would minimize the delay between granting and recording; and it would avoid spending administrative time checking on whether or not they were recorded. Discussion ensued as to how the City assures such recording is done and what fee is adequate. Boche moved, seconded by Barry, that a minimum $30.00 fee be charged for recording variances and conditional uses plus additional charges for the recording when the fee is greater; and that staff investigate whether the City is charging adequate fees for the rezoning, variance, and conditional use requests. The motion carried unanimously. UNIVERSITY GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMONS AND LOTS 7 AND 14, WHICH ACT AS A COMMONS In response to an inquiry moved to recommend to the Neighborhood Commons Area of University Grove. The unanimously. from the University of Minnesota, Boche City Council that it not purchase the and Lots 7 and 14, which act as a Commons, motion was seconded by Barry and approved CITY EASEMENT ON THE EXTENSION OF FOLWELL AVENUE IN AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 90 IN THE UNIVERSITY GROVE NEIGHBORHOOD Discussion ensued on whether the easement would be needed for street • extension, whether it would be needed as a connection for the proposed bicycle/pedestrian trail as proposed in the Park and Recreation Plan and whether it should be given with no charge to the University.