My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
04/09/1986 P&Z Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Minutes
>
1986
>
04/09/1986 P&Z Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/21/2014 2:15:00 PM
Creation date
7/18/2014 11:25:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Minutes
Meeting Date
04/09/1986
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.
/
6
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 />PLANNING & ZONING BOARD <br />April 9, 1986 <br />Page Three <br />Mr. McLean seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. <br />MOTION: Mr. Cody moved to recommend to Council approval of the site <br />and building plan for Rockey Goertz /Tim Klosner of 454 Lilac St., <br />Lino Lakes, MN 55014, application number 86 -13 dated 3/28/86, <br />(because it complies with Section 5, Subd. 4), with the following <br />conditions: 1) Appropriate highway access be obtained, 2) The design <br />plans of the building are approved by the Building Official, 3) The <br />engineer approve the site and building plan. Motion seconded by Mr. <br />McLean. Motion carried unanimously. <br />Mr. Goertz was informed that his request will be considered by the <br />April 28 Council for final approval. <br />- LOT SPLIT & VARIANCE - CHARLES GRAMITH <br />Mr. Gramith appeared before the Board to request that he be allowed <br />to create two lots with frontage out of three lots (one without front- <br />age). This property is in the rural zone where ten acre lots are <br />minimum. The two lots Mr. Gramith wishes to create will still be <br />less than ten acres each. <br />411 Mr. Prokop felt that a precedent has been set in the past to approve <br />a plan which creates a better situation or makes a nonconforming <br />situation less nonconforming. <br />Mr. Johnson said that he did not see a need for a variance in this <br />situation and the lot split would be considered a minor subdivision. <br />MOTION: Mr. McLean moved to change the application to read "minor <br />subdivision" rather than "variance to lot size" and "lot split ". <br />Mr. Cody seconded the motion provided the applicant agree. It was <br />explained to the applicant that the only difference this motion <br />would make is to call the application by its proper title, so as <br />not to cause confusion. The applicant agreed to the change. The <br />motion carried unanimously. <br />MOTION: Mr. McLean moved to recommend to Council approval of the <br />minor subdivision for Charles Gramith for Parcel #9010; Lot 1, Block <br />1; and Lot 2, Block 1; as noted on the application. The purpose of <br />approval would be to consolidate substandard lots into two lots of <br />less nonconformance. Reference can be made to Ordinance 09 -85, which <br />amends the City Code with regard to minor subdivisions. Mrs. Klaus <br />seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. <br />Mr. Gramith was informed that his application will receive final <br />consideration by the City Council on April 28, 1986. <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.