My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/08/2001 Council Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2001
>
01/08/2001 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2015 1:33:21 PM
Creation date
2/4/2015 11:43:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
01/08/2001
Council Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2001 <br />PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAVE PECCHIA <br />There was no Public Safety Department report. <br />COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT <br />Resolution No. 01— 02, Variance Request by Chris Lyden, 6275 Holly Drive, Jeff Smyser (3/5 <br />Vote Required) — Staff presented the application by explaining Chris Lyden owns 4.07 acres of <br />property, zoned rural, at 6275 Holly Drive. Since the ordinance requires a minimum of ten acres in <br />the rural zoning district, this property is a pre-existing non -conforming lot of record. Mr. Lyden <br />would like to construct a 34 -foot by 64 -foot pole barn on the property using metal siding and roofing <br />material. The Zoning Ordinance specifically prohibits metal siding and roofing material on properties <br />less that five (5) acres in size. The proposed construction will meet the square footage requirement <br />and setback requirements. <br />Staff reviewed the findings of fact that need to be met for variance consideration and indicated staff <br />does not believe this variance criteria can be met in this case since Mr. an construct a wood <br />frame building, on footings without a slab, that would have a simi a t to ;•ost frame building, <br />although it would be more costly. Staff advised it has received ua sts for such <br />construction and always discouraged the variance procedure c i st cases, the requests were <br />based on the additional construction costs. <br />Staff presented its analysis of the request, notin app ,ant has described his hardship as follows: • <br />1. Pole barn type constru • b e for this property due to questionable soils. <br />2. Pole barn type • t+n, wi out a cement floor, is necessary to preserve 1958 mid - <br />engine all wr due to moisture factors. <br />3. Pole b. •` truction will reduce threat of loss from grass fires. <br />Staff noted the adjoinin_ +roperty owners have indicated no objections to the variance request. <br />Mayor Bergeson inquired about the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board. <br />Staff advised the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed this item at their December 2000 meeting. <br />Mr. Rafferty made a motion to approve the variance and was supported by Ms. Lane. Motion failed <br />with 3 ayes, 3 nays, and 1 abstain. <br />Council Member Carlson referred to the Findings of Fact. She inquired about how the City should <br />handle the Findings of Fact that are not met on the resolution itself. The City Attorney advised the <br />Findings of Fact that are not met should be noted on the resolution. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.