Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />• <br />PLANNING & ZONING BOARD <br />July 21, 1994 <br />Tom Mesich indicated that maybe the ordinance is too <br />restrictive on the larger lots and possibly the City should <br />considering loosening the regulations. Vice Chairman Robinson <br />indicated that he agreed with Mr. Mesich and indicated that <br />the Board needs to determine specific grounds for granting a <br />variance. He also felt future variances should be dealt with <br />one at a time, based on their particular circumstances. This <br />is unique because prior to 1990 he could have constructed the <br />addition with no variance. <br />Rick Gelbmann asked how long it would take to revise the <br />Ordinance. Mary Kay indicated 60 -90 days or longer. He also <br />expressed concern on setting a precedent in this case. <br />Ed Schones stated that we do have a set of rules and until we <br />change those rules it is imperative that we follow them. Mr. <br />Banta can purchase the additional 20' from the neighbor and <br />have adequate room to construct the proposed addition. It is <br />important to me that I follow the guidelines we have. <br />Chairman Robinson felt this particular lot size was overlooked <br />at the time the ordinance was revised. <br />John Landers indicated that he agreed with Mr. Schones and <br />wondered how many variance we would have if this one is <br />approved. Tom Mesich added that this variance request does <br />not meet the requirements of the ordinance. If Mr. Banta is <br />interested in having the ordinance changed, he should contact <br />staff. Rick Gelbmann also agreed and indicated that we should <br />set some procedure on how we handle variances - if it does not <br />meet the criteria - it will not be granted. <br />John Landers then made a motion to deny the variance. Ed <br />Schones Seconded the motion. On roll call: <br />Ayes: Gelbmann, Landers, Mesich, Nordine, Schones <br />Nays: Robinson <br />Motion carried to deny variance. <br />Tom Mesich made a recommendation to the City Council that the <br />P & Z feels the restrictions for accessory buildings on 1 -2 <br />1/2 acre lots are too restrictive and suggested that the <br />Council consider expanding the square footage that is <br />allowable. Rick Gelbmann seconded the motion with the request <br />that it be expedited. <br />Ayes: Gelbmann, Landers, Mesich, Nordine, Robinson <br />Nays: Schones <br />Motion carried. <br />B. 94 -11 -P, Trappers Crossing, Hokanson Devel., Holly Drive <br />Planning Consultant Brixius explained that Hokanson <br />Development submitted a letter to the City Council requesting <br />that their preliminary plat for a PDO, denied by the P & Z, be <br />returned to the P & Z with a concept for an R -1X plat <br />2 <br />