My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
05/08/2002 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2002
>
05/08/2002 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2014 3:38:34 PM
Creation date
6/5/2014 12:04:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
05/08/2002
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.
/
59
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 />Thorp Variance & Minor Subidivison <br />May 8, 2002 <br />should never have been combined under one PIN. Were this the case, Lot 28 would exist <br />as a legal non - conformity and could be sold to Mr. Neeck. <br />What is known, is that in 1983 Anoka County records show that Lots 28, 29, & 30 were <br />owned by the Thorps under one PIN (09- 31- 22 -24- 0030). In 1998 the Thorps sold Lot <br />30, leaving the resulting Lots 28 & 29 combined as they are at this time. In reviewing <br />such a transaction, the separate sale of Lot 30 in 1998 clearly should not have taken place <br />or been allowed according to City Ordinance, for the same reasons that preclude the sale <br />of Lot 28 at this time. However, an administrative oversight seems to have taken place, <br />as records show that the Lino Lakes City Clerk certified the subdivision of the parcel to <br />break off Lot 30 without City Council approval. <br />ANALYSIS <br />City Ordinance requires property zoned R -X to be a minimum of 10 acres in size. The <br />Thorps property currently exists as a legal non - conformity, as do most all of the lots in <br />the Lake View Woodlands subdivision. Further subdivision, however, would increase, or <br />exacerbate, the non - conformity of the property, violating City Zoning Ordinance. For <br />this reason, it is the recommendation of staff to deny the request for a Variance from the <br />minimum lot size for property located in an R -X Zone as well as the Minor Subdivision. <br />• <br />OPTIONS <br />1. Recommend approval of the Minor Subdivision and Variance. <br />2. Recommend denial of the Minor Subdivision and Variance. <br />3. Return to staff with direction. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Option #2. <br />ATTACHMENTS <br />1. General location map. <br />2. Survey of lot, showing proposed split. <br />3. Anoka County half - section map (pre -2001: date unknown). <br />4. Anoka County half - section map (2001). <br />5. Applicant submittal: "Rationale for Variance." <br />6. Applicant submittal: email of time -line. <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.