Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />May 14, 2003 <br />Page 5 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />Mr. Hyden asked what state was his septic sy stem in. Mr. Laumeyer stated he had it <br />pumped yesterday and he received an inspecti on report from the City noting it had passed <br />the inspection. <br />Mr. Hyden asked if the septic system would accommodate the new addition. Mr. <br />Laumeyer replied he would need to investig ate this further, but he was not opposed to <br />putting in another septic system if necessary, but he did not want to put a septic system in <br />if the City came through with City water in the near future. <br />Chair Schaps stated he would have the opt ion of hooking up to the City water when it <br />becomes available. <br />Mr. Rafferty asked if he was doubling the size of he home. Mr. Laumeyer replied it <br />would be a 24x30 addition. <br />Mr. Rafferty stated based on the guidelines, it appeared the home should never have been <br />placed where it was. Ms. Gretz replied those guidelines did not exist when the home was <br />built. She noted the Ordinance allowed what existed to continue, but once something was <br />changed or added onto, the current Ordinance existed. <br />Mr. Rafferty asked if there was another option for applicant to expa nd. Ms. Gretz replied <br />it was not possible for applicant to expa nd his home and stay within the setback. <br />Mr. Rafferty asked how old was the garage. Mr. Laumeyer replied the garage was built <br />in approximately 1968. He noted the DNR flooded the lake and at the time the garage <br />and home were built, Lake Amelia was considerably smaller. <br />Mr. Corson asked if applicant had spoken w ith the DNR and asked if the DNR had any <br />concern with the septic system. Mr. Laumeyer stated he had not spoken directly to the <br />DNR, but City staff had. He noted the se ptic system should not be considered non- <br />conforming according to the Ordinance. <br />Mr. Tralle asked if there would be any addi tional bathrooms, or water usages with this <br />addition. Mr. Laumeyer replied there was not . He was proposing to add a family room <br />and storage space only. <br />Mr. Hyden asked at what point were they to deem this a hardship. He noted applicant <br />had no other options. He stated it looked as if applicant had a hardsh ip. Ms. Gretz replied <br />in her interpretation, she was looking at past use and that this property had been put to <br />reasonable use in the past. She agreed expa nsion would be better, but that did not get <br />away from the fact that this property had be en put to reasonable use in the past. She <br />stated while applicant could not improve his property, he still had a reasonable use of this <br />property. <br /> <br />Mr. Lyden stated the home was built in 1959 and many years had passed and he believed <br />applicant had the right to upgrade his home to bring it up to par with other homes in the <br />City. He noted this was in the best intere st of Lino Lakes to allow him to improve his