My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
02/09/2005 P&Z Packet
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2005
>
02/09/2005 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/20/2014 1:29:42 PM
Creation date
6/18/2014 12:11:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
02/09/2005
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.
/
128
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
• <br />• <br />• <br />Planning & Zoning Board <br />January 12, 2005 <br />Page 7 <br />Chair Rafferty asked Ms. Bachmeier how she got along with Mr. Muehlstedt. Ms. <br />Bachmeier, 2215 Reiling Road, replied it was not a pleasant experience and she would <br />like to sell. <br />Mr. Tralle asked if there were any other encroachments. Ms. Markiewicz replied there <br />was another issue with the septic system that was presently in the Anoka County Courts. <br />Mr. Laden asked if there was a setback requirement for a cement slab. Mr. Studenski <br />replied to his knowledge, there was nothing specifically, but he would check with the <br />building official. He stated typically the newer City lots, could not have anything placed <br />within the drainage easement, but these were old lots and they did not have drainage <br />easements. <br />Chair Rafferty asked that the eight inch encroachment into the setback be verified and if <br />there was something that should be done about it, that proper measures were taken. <br />Mr. Laden asked which department in the City would handle a violation of the storage of <br />personal property. Mr. Bengtson responded that was handled as a joint effort between the <br />Police Department and the Community Development Department. He indicated the <br />Building Department could also be involved. <br />Mr. Laden stated regardless of whatever recommendation the Board has and the <br />homeowner takes, he asked if an as -built survey would be provided by applicant after the <br />work was completed. Mr. Bengtson replied the Board could add that as a condition if <br />they wanted. <br />Mr. Root asked if they should add as a condition that the slab be removed. Mr. Smyser <br />replied they could add a condition that staff do further investigation regarding the slab <br />and the 8 inch encroachment issues. <br />Chair Rafferty asked if there was an identification of how many structures could be on <br />this particular lot in this zoning. Mr. Bengston replied there were guidelines and this did <br />meet the size limitations, even if they were allowed to keep the addition. He stated this <br />was the only storage structure, so they would be under the number allowed. <br />Chair Rafferty stated he believed there were additional structures. Ms. Bachmeier stated <br />they also had a storage shed. <br />Mr. Smyser stated the Building Code required a permit if it was a certain size, but if it <br />was under that size a permit was not required. He stated he believed they were allowed <br />two accessory structures and the issue was the setback, not the number of accessory <br />buildings or size. <br />Ms. Markiewicz asked with respect the cement slab issue, if the variance was denied and <br />the structure complied with the building code requirements, there would be a cement slab <br />sitting on the property line while the accessory structure would be away from it and on <br />aesthetics alone, they would like to have the slab removed. <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.