My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
12/08/1982 P&Z Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Minutes
>
1982
>
12/08/1982 P&Z Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/21/2014 1:35:12 PM
Creation date
7/21/2014 11:45:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Minutes
Meeting Date
12/08/1982
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.
/
3
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
December 8, 1982 <br />Planning and Zoning Board <br />Page -2- <br />ance the maximum driveway width should be 26 feet. Later when lot 20 is developed there <br />• will also be a 26 foot driveway on that lot making a combined driveway for lots 19 and <br />20 of 52 feet. Mr. Amundson said he would change his drawing to reflect a 26 foot drive- <br />way rather than a 30 foot driveway. <br />Mr. Prokop questioned the elevations drawn on the site plan. Mr. Kluegel showed the <br />Board the original plat plan which shows the elevations to be the same. <br />Mr. Johnson arrived at 8:05 P.M. <br />Mr. Johnson asked what material will be used to construct the building. Mr. Amundson <br />said the building will be constructed of wood and stucco. The only metal will be the <br />drip caps. <br />Mr. Johnson asked about the setback on the north side of the building. Mr. Amundson <br />said there will be a 5 foot sodded area between the blacktop driveway and the lot line. <br />Mr. Johnson noted that variances are usually granted for hardship cases. It would be <br />hard to prove hardship of the land in this case. Ordinance #85 was read and it indicated <br />that a variance can be granted if the variance is consistent with the letter and intent <br />of the Community Development Plan. Hardship does not have to be proved. <br />Mr. Doocy asked about the front setback. Will it be consistent with the development on <br />either side of Mr. Amundson's lot. Mr. Kluegel said he would check the minutes regard- <br />ing the other two developments to see that this development is consistent. <br />S Mr. Johnson asked about the septic system. Mr. Kluegel said he had calculated using <br />WPC -40 that a 1,250 gallon septic tank and 500 square feet of drainfield would be suff- <br />icient for this development. <br />Mr. Prokop moved to recommend to the Council a variance to Ordinance #85 be granted <br />to Mr. Amundson for the purpose as stipulated in Mr. Amundson's request dated November <br />29, 1982 for lot 19, block 2, Caroles Estates II. This variance would be consistent <br />with the present use in this area. Mr. Goldade seconded the motion. Motion declared <br />passed. <br />Mr. Johnson noted that the Special Use Permit request is for two purposes. Each purpose <br />should be addressed in the motion to accept or deny the request. <br />Mr. Prokop moved to recommend to the Council that Special Use Permits as requested by <br />Mr. Amundson November 29, 1982 for lot 19, block 2, Caroles Estates III in regard to <br />4.23 and 4.04D of Ordinance #56 be approved with the stipulation as stated by Mr. Amund- <br />son that a 1,250 gallon septic tank and 500 square feet of drainfield as testified by <br />Mr. Kluegel be installed and access to lot 19 shall be 30 feet at the roadway and tapered <br />to 26 feet at the lot line and this be corrected by Mr. Amundson on his drawings (plot <br />plan) as submitted to the Planning and Zoning Board as of December 8, 1982. Mr. Doocy <br />seconded the motion. Motion declared passed. <br />Mr. Prokop moved to recommend to the Council that the request for the Special Use Permit <br />request by the Henry James Properties represented by Mr. Amundson for a Special Use <br />Permit to lot 19, block 2, Caroles Estates II to construct an office building with no <br />• outside storage, to house lawyers, dentist, etc. dated November 29, 1982 be approved <br />pending the check by Mr. Kluegel relative to landscaping and screening to make it con- <br />sistent with the other commercial establishments in the area and also pending a check <br />by Mr. Kluegel on the question of setbacks again to be consistent with the other comm- <br />ercial establishment in the area, that it be a one ownership or partnership, not a con - <br />dominium type of ownership and that the question raised by Mr. Short relative to parking <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.