Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />November 14, 2007 <br />Page 2 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />submitted for review. Therefore, staff explai ned that the variance application will be <br />placed on the December meeting agenda. <br /> <br />Staff explained that the applicant’s garage was built with a permit and was inspected. <br />However it was since discovered that setback re quirements were not properly met. The <br />applicant brought a variance request for the setback before the P&Z Board a few years <br />past, the P&Z recommended denial and the app licant chose to withdraw the application. <br />Staff explained that the applicant then remove d what he believed to be the encroachment. <br /> <br />Ms. Bachmeier stated that Mr. Muehlstedt’s existing garage, driveway and fence do not <br />meet setback requirements. <br /> <br />Mr. Grochala explained that there have been a nu mber of issues with this site. He stated <br />that the matters in question recently went befo re the city council and have been turned <br />over to the City Attorney for review. Mr. Gr ochala added that both property owners need <br />to be heard by the board. <br /> <br />Ms. Bachmeier noted that the structural engi neer who gave his opi nion to Pete Kluegel <br />(city building official), rega rding the addition to the att ached garage, did so without <br />visiting the property. She stated th is addition does not meet code. <br /> <br />Mr. Tralle stated that he unde rstands the property owners’ fr ustration, but the issue will <br />be discussed at next month’s meeting. He as ked for their patience with this issue. Mr. <br />Tralle requested that staff speak with th e city’s attorney a nd move things along. <br /> <br />Mr. Pogalz made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:44 p.m. Motion was supported by <br />Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6 - 0. <br /> <br />V. ACTION ITEMS <br /> <br />A. PUBLIC HEARING for an Amendment to the City of Lino Lakes Zoning <br />Ordinance, Section 3, Subd. 3.B. relate d to the subdivision of unsewered lots <br /> <br />Michael Grochala, Community Development Di rector, presented the staff report. He <br />noted that the city council reviewed the la nguage and requested that it be brought to the <br />P&Z Board for a recommendation. <br /> <br />Mr. Grochala explained that limiting the lot si ze is typically an unde rwriting issue to aid <br />in the sale of property. The reason appears to be that in the case of a foreclosure, the <br />lender would have an easier time selling a sma ller property rather than a larger one. He <br />explained that although a propert y owner would be required to combine the split parcels <br />prior to a sale, a foreclos ure would allow the removed parcel to be sold alone. <br /> <br />Board Members were concerned that the city’s in tent is to control growth and not be left <br />with small lots, and this c ould potentially be a huge exception. They noted that <br />foreclosures are common and it seems that the city would be opening itself up to <br />opportunities for smaller parcels. They we re concerned about th e number of potential