My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
12/08/2021 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2021
>
12/08/2021 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/13/2022 10:30:23 AM
Creation date
12/3/2021 3:54:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
12/08/2021
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
118
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
Planning & Zoning Board <br />November 10, 2021 <br />Page 11 <br />Mr. Grochala commented this will create problems and likely will not be well <br />received by the public. <br />Mr. Laden made a MOTION to recommend changing the side yard setbacks for new <br />primary and accessory buildings to 7.5 ft. while current side yard will remain <br />unchanged. Motion was supported by Mr. Reinert. Motion carried 4 — 1. Chair <br />Tralle abstained. <br />Porch Depth <br />Board Comments <br />Mr. Wipperfurth commented he has two adirondack chairs and a small table on this 6 <br />ft. porch and there is still plenty of space remaining. <br />Mr. Laden asked if his porch has a railing. <br />Mr. Wipperfurth said his porch does not have a railing. He recalled the Board <br />previously recommended if the building code required a railing, an 8 ft. porch would <br />be required. Mr. Wipperfurth supported the recommendation. <br />Mr. Reinert made a MOTION to recommend an 8 ft. porch depth if a railing is <br />required and a 6 ft. porch depth if a railing is not required. Motion was supported by <br />Mr. Laden. <br />Board Discussion <br />Mr. Laden commented single family homes do not require a porch. <br />Mr. Grochala explained porches are required on single family homes in R-2 districts. <br />Since the City allowed the developer to create 62 ft. wide lots, the City specified the <br />garage either had to be positioned sideways with a decorative front facing the street or <br />a decorative garage door and a porch was required if the garage was faced the street. <br />These specifications were purely aesthetic. <br />Mr. Laden recommended disregarding the porch size. <br />Ms. Larsen stated City staff wants to adjust the code so it is easier for everyone to <br />understand and for staff to administer. 6 ft. porch depth was recommended by City <br />staff because the previous three developments requested 6 ft. She cautioned the <br />Board, if they proceed with the motion, they will be prohibiting residents who have a <br />6 ft. porch from installing a railing. <br />Mr. Evenson commented since variances were granted for 6 ft. porch depths, the <br />Board should be consistent and adjust the ordinance accordingly. <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.