05/21/1980 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

May 21, 1980 Planning and Zoning Board The regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board was called to -der at 7:30 P.M. Members present; Reinert, Porkop, Doocy, Bathke, Heath. Johnson will be late, Mrs. Schwankl was absent. The minutes of April 16, 1980 was considered. Mrs. Schwankl arrived. Mr. Reinert could not locate.' his copy of the P &Z minutes. Mr. Schumacher was asked for a report of Council actions. He reported on the request of MarDon for rezoning to R2. No action was taken on this matter due to the absence of a letter of credit for that development. This matter will be handled at that time. Mr. Prokop questioned the statement concerning the mining permit - P &Z does not have to review this type of permit. Mr. Schumacher reported on the ordinance amendment dealing with the accessory buildings. Mr. Schumacher reported on the request of the Council in reference to Scheunemann's Corner. They had requested that this be shown in a manner that would allow the future splitting of those interior lots. This is being done. The Tim Rehbine request for a variance to the side yard set back was denied and Mr. Rehbine was requested to acquire additional land to meet this requirement. The special Use permit request of Mr. Michael Kenney was approved. Mr. Gehrman was asked for additional information. Skyline Autobody special use permit .s approved. The mobile home request by Mr. Illg was denied, Mr. Doocy questioned Ord. #73 - what is it? Mayor Gourley explained this is a combination of #26 and 26A - these two will be repealed and #73 written to replace them. This deals with the keeping of animals. The first item on the agenda was Mr. Lyndal Nelson. Mr. Schumacher explained that Mr. Nelson had applied for a variance to side yard setbacks due to the fact that his home was constructed too near the line. There was discussion on the fact that Mr. Nelson had applied previous and had been denied and does not feel that he should pay the fee the second time. Mr. Nelson said he did not feel that Mr. Mobley did his job. Mr. Nelson ex- plained the front stake was lined up with the wrong stake on the rear of the lot. Mr. Nelson indicated that he felt that this was the responsibility of the building inspector to make sure this house was placed in the proper place. Mr. Reinert and Mr. SChumacher informed Mr. Nelson that this is not the responsibility of the building inspector - he has neither the time not the staff to survey each lot to assure that the house is placed properly. This house is constructed to within 6 inches of the property line. Mr. Nelson has not had this surveyed so he is not sure of this measurement. This problem was not dicsovered until the house next door was being staked for excavation. The possibility of Mr. Nelsoipurchasing additional footage from his neighbor It s been discussed, but Mr. Nelson felt this was undue expense to him, and uld cause his neighbor's land to have less value. Mr. Reinert asked if this lot line is adjusted, what will this do to the set- back of the house next to him? Mr. Schumacher suggested an angle transfer to give Mr. Nelson additional frontage and the man next door additional footage in the rear.