07/14/2004 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d Ju ly 14 , 200 4 Page 7 APPROVED MINUTES Staff stated on November 13, 2003 the City of Lino Lakes issued a single-family home – new construction building permit to Bacchus Homes, Inc. for 6396 Langer Lane (Lot 22, Block 2 of Clearwater Creek 5 th Addition). The survey submitted with the building permit application on November 5, 2003 indicated the required 5-foot side setback for the attached accessory structure (garage) as is required by the City of Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance. The permit was issued based on this proof of compliance with the zoning code requirements. Staff noted the City of Lino Lakes requires a ll new construction to submit an “As-Built” survey verifying that the structures are built to the approved specificati ons. In the case of the subject property, the “As-Built” survey indi cated that the attached accessory structure (garage) had actually been built to a 3.9-foot side setback rather than the 5-foot side setback as required by the City of Lino Lakes Zoning Ordinance. The applicant is now requesting that a varian ce of 1.1 feet be granted from the ordinance requirement. Staff presented their analysis and recommended approving the variance. Mr. Hyden asked how this happened. Mr. Smys er replied the builder made an error. Mr. Studenski stated this had happened in the past and the building inspectors had stepped up their inspections to find these errors in time. Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to recommend appr oving the variance to side yard setback, 6396 Langer Lane, Bacchus Homes and was s upported by Mr. Pogalz. Motion carried 5- 0. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Temporary Signage, Revi ew of Special Meeting Staff summarized the special P&Z meeting on June 16 to discuss temporary signage. He stated the P&Z Board needed to discuss what types of temporary signage they want to regulate, the definitions of temporary signs, banners, etc., the allowable location(s) for temporary signage, the allowable size (incl uding if a temporary sign should be included in the maximum amount of signage allowed), the allowable time limit for temporary signed (if any), and the enforcement. Mr. Root stated there was a couple of wa ys they could look at this, one was the temporary signs such as realtor signs, garage sales signs, etc. and th e temporary signs that were there for a longer period of time. He agre ed signs should not be attached to utility poles and they should be limited in height. He stated signs that we re on-site, should be limited to a total area limitation, including signs that are permanently affixed or truly temporary. He stated if a temporary sign was fixed to the building, it should be considered a permanent sign. He agreed they did not have sufficient staff to monitor violations, but believed this could be handled on a complaint basis. He noted this was going to be a tough issue to deal with to ba lance between the aesthe tics and the needs and