09/11/2002 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2002 Page 6 APPROVED MINUTES Staff noted this application for a Variance is dr iven by three site cons traints: location of a septic system, well, and a pond. Each of th ese constraints preven t siting the proposed garage in a location next to, or behind, th e house, in compliance with the Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance. As a result, staff feels th ere is a demonstrated need/hardship that is site-driven and quantifiable, a nd so justifiable. Staff would recommend approval of the proposed Variance with the following condition: 1.) The proposed garage be placed no closer than 62 feet from Wood Duck Trail. 2.) The 10 x 10 shed is to be removed. Mr. Lyden asked what was the number of accessory buildings. Ms. Gretz stated she believed it was two. Mr. Lyden stated when he drove out to the site, there were two sheds and asked if they were both owned by Mr. Sullivan. Chair Schaps invited appl icant to make comment. Mr. Sullivan, 8065 Wood Duck Trail, replied there was a 10x10 shed that would be taken down once they got a dumpster for the construction of the proposed garage. Chair Schaps asked if Mr. Sullivan agreed to adding the 10 x 10 shed to be removed as a part of the conditions. Mr . Sullivan replied he did agree to that requirement. Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to approve Michael & Laura Sullivan, 8065 Wood Duck Trail, Variance subject to staff’s recomme ndations and conditions as outlined in staff’s report. The motion was supported by Mr. Lyden. Motion carried 4-0. C.Donald Lindahl, 855 Ash Street , Minor Subdivision & Variance Staff stated this item was presented at the August 14 th meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board. After consideration of the issues, me mbers voted to table the application pending additional information from the applicant. Sp ecifically, Mr. Lindahl was asked to present alternate configurations for th e proposed one-acre lot (Tract B), in hopes that it might be possible to achieve the required 330 feet of lot width/road frontage. Mr. Lindahl has presented two alternate c onfigurations for consideration by members. Both proposals would meet the minimum lot wi dth/road frontage requirement of 330 feet. However, as a result of meeting the width requirement, lot size then increases over the one-acre threshold. Since there are only 11 acres total to be used between the two proposed lots, such an increase in the size of proposed Tract B, then decreases the size of proposed Tract A under the 10 acres minimum re quirement for property in a Rural zone.