05/28/2002 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 28, 2002 Property is defined by its legal description. Every property has a Parcel Identification Number. The County will not allow property to be subdivided unless the City has approved the subdivision. The City uses the PIN and legal description to determine what the parcel is. Since the property in question has one PIN and the legal description included all the property, it is one parcel. Division of any parcel must comply with City requirements, including lot size. Mr. Joyer and the Thorps are questioning when and how the two lots became combined under one PIN. It is their contention that the two lots were purchased separately and should never have been combined under one PIN. Were this the case, Lot 28 would exist as a legal non -conformity and could be sold to Mr. Neeck. What is known, is that in 1983 Anoka County records show that Lots 28, 29, & 30 were owned by the Thorps under on PIN (09-31-22-24-0030). IN 1998 the Thorps sold Lot 30, leaving the resulting Lots 28 & 29 combined as they are at this time. In reviewing such a saction, the separate sale of Lot 30 in 1998 clearly should not have taken place or been allowed accor ;. to City Ordinance, for the same reasons that preclude the sale of Lot 28 at this time. Howe , . g ¢ dministrative oversight seems to have taken place, as records show that the Lino L Ci erk (at that time) certified the subdivision of the parcel to break off Lot 30 without City C cilpproval. Community Development Director Grochala reviewe and staff comments relating to the Findings of Fact Variance and Minor Subdivision as a result of th The Planning and Zoning Board reviewed th consideration of the issues, the Board vot Subdivision. It was noted that two reso application should be approved. aff analysis noting the Findings of Fact aff is , commending denial of the proposed s of Fact. ve report at the May 8, 2002 meeting. After end approval of the Variance and Minor ve been prepared in case the Council determines the Councilmember Carlson ex•ressed c 'ei regarding locations for an alternative septic system. She stated the alternate site is in �� of, ' building. She asked if there has been an assessment of where the septic system woul® have' : be p aced on both lots. Community Development Direclr Grochala stated both lots would accommodate an alternative septic location. He advised he is not sure if the septic system would be a mound system. Councilmember Dahl asked if the action for the minor subdivision would occur first. Community Development Director Grochala stated the technically the action for the variance should occur prior to the minor subdivision. Councilmember Dahl asked if the minor subdivision is subject to park dedication fees. Community Development Director Grochala stated park dedication fees do apply in this case. The residential fee for minor subdivisions is $1,665.00. Mayor Bergeson referred to exhibit 3 in the staff report and asked if that is a drawing from the original development. Community Development Director Grochala stated the map is an undated map