02/09/2000 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION FEBRUARY 9, 2000 The Environmental Board reviewed the request and concurred with his recommendation but suggested an unmowed area of 40' from the OHW. They also suggested the applicant work with the Environmental Specialist on modifications to the septic system that would include a pretreatment system. Staff indicated they believe the variance criteria can be met in review of this case. There is hardship, not created by the property owner; the hardship is not economic; the property is unique as it was created prior to the adoption of the 10 -acre minimum requirement in the Zoning Ordinance and the Shoreland Ordinance. There is 145' from the front property line to the OHW level. A 30' front setback and a 100' OHW setback would leave only 15' to build in thus making the property unusable. The balance of Reshanau Lake properties maintain a similar setback to that requested. Staff noted this item is on the Planning and Zoning Board meeting agenda this evening. Staff recommended approval of the variance as requested based on conditions. This item will appear on the regular Council agenda Monday, Feb 2000, 6:30 p.m. JADT FINAL PLAT UPDATE, JEFF SMYSER Staff advised the City Council approved the pr submitted final plat shows some differences. different. This is because the final pla slight adjustment in a road alignm 'n April, 1999. The po ' o Drive alignment is slightly ent supplied by the City. This More importantly, the fin.z t s adhtional outlots. Instead of three (3) outlots, there are now five (5) o this is that the developer encountered difficulties acquiring a mort or .. eproperty. The finalplat breaks the property upin a way g g P P Y that allows the dev G� �o� tain a mortgage on a portion of the site. Staff advised their c sT'cern with this is that the change must not create additional buildable lots. The developer's attorney has stated that the developer agrees to a stipulation that the lots are not buildable until the plat is revised. This is stated in a faxed letter of February 4, 2000, to Bill Hawkins, City Attorney, from Gary Gandrud. As long at the City Attorney assures the City that this agreement is enforceable and the City is protected from any claim to additional buildable lots, staff recommended approval of this arrangement. The City and the developer have been negotiating the issue of the extension of Apollo Drive. At the December 20, 1999, Council meeting, the Council approved initiating an eminent domain action and a feasibility study for the extension of Apollo Drive. Since the Apollo Drive extension now will be a public project, the developer does not have to construct the road and utilities. Therefore, the typical development agreement, with its 3