Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />DECEMBER 10, 1992 <br />precedent would be set that the City should be <br />concerned about. <br />Keis recommended approval of a Conditional Use Permit <br />to expand a non - conforming single - family house at 2354 <br />Greenbrier Circle as requested by Mr. John Grabrick and <br />as recommended by the City Planner in his report dated <br />December 4, 1992. <br />Motion seconded by Carson. <br />Motion carried 6 - 0. <br />HERKENHOFF DeLonais reported that Mr. Herkenhoff will be late to <br />the meeting this evening as he has a school function he <br />must attend first. <br />COSTA III Mr. Bob DeBace, representing the Costa Family, appeared <br />FINAL before the Commission requesting final plat approval <br />PLAT for Costa Estates Phase III. DeBace reported that the <br />final plat is in conformance with the preliminary plat <br />that was submitted, except for elimination of a small <br />strip of property on the north end of the plat. The <br />property that is adjacent to this area will now be <br />included in the plat, and the two lots involved will be <br />assessed for the improvement of Costa Lane. <br />The City Planner felt that the reserve strip should be <br />maintained adjacent to the Bruhn property. The Planner <br />noted that there is approximately 21 feet of the Bruhn <br />property that would front on Costa Lane otherwise, and <br />he was concerned that sometime in the future, the <br />property owner would request access to Costa Lane <br />without having paid the assessment for that street. <br />DeBace reported that the reserve strip could be <br />maintained adjacent to the Bruhn property. DeBace <br />reported that the adjacent property owned by David <br />Wright will participate in the project and will have <br />two lots fronting on Costa Lane. <br />Garske recommended approval of the final plat for Costa <br />Estates III subject to the recommendations of the City <br />Planner in his report dated December 4, 1992 with the <br />requirement that the reserve strip adjacent to the <br />Bruhn property be retained. <br />Motion seconded by Pedersen. <br />Motion carried 6 - 0. <br />Page 4 <br />