My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-23-2014 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
07-23-2014 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/6/2014 1:19:16 PM
Creation date
8/6/2014 1:18:52 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JULY 23, 2014 <br />however, the City's practice of asking for two garage stalls per unit and <br />indicated that the proposal is out -of -character with this practice. <br />Keis asked if the three garage stalls proposed were open or divided. <br />McManus replied that they are open, but could be divided if the Council <br />wanted. McManus noted that they are proposing three stalls since the <br />average 75 year old might have one vehicle and the younger occupant (55 <br />years or older) might have two. McManus indicated that there was room <br />for a fourth garage stall, but felt the addition of the fourth stall would <br />detract from the structure. McManus estimated the sale price for the <br />structure would be $450,000. <br />Keis stated that he felt the structure proposed was a duplex, and was not <br />sure if that was an issue or not for him. McManus noted that the City of <br />St. Paul has many many duplexes. He felt that the structure as proposed <br />would be a contribution to the City and will correct several problems with <br />the property which he stated earlier in the meeting. He noted that the <br />structure would be set back 60 feet from Little Canada Road and would be <br />80 feet from the lake. McManus again noted that there will be one owner, <br />the units will not be owned individually. He indicated that they will abide <br />with the City's ordinances and are not asking for any variances. <br />Montour asked if this structure would be subject to the City's Rental <br />Housing Ordinance. The City Administrator reported that it would unless <br />owner -occupied with one unit rented to a family member. <br />McGraw stated that his concern was that he could not see the future of this <br />structure. He was concern that once ownership of the structure changes, <br />the City would be faced with a request to delete the age restriction on <br />occupancy as a new owner might claim a hardship of not being able to <br />abide by the age restriction. McGraw was concerned about creating a <br />problem for a future City council. <br />McGraw noted that the plans before the Council are marked "For Review - <br />Not For Construction". The City Planner indicated that if the Council <br />approves the PUD Permit, full construction plans would have to be <br />submitted for a building permit. The Building Official would then verify <br />that the construction plans are substantially the same as what is before the <br />Council this evening. <br />There was additional discussion about the number of garage stalls with the <br />City Planner clarifying that two stalls per unit was not a Code <br />requirement, but has been required by the City as past practice. The Code <br />requires two parking spaces per unit. <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.