Laserfiche WebLink
COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 26, 2004 <br />APPROVED <br />92 PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAVE PECCHIA <br />.93 <br />94 There was no report. <br />95 <br />96 <br />97 <br />98 PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, RICK DEGARDNER <br />99 <br />100 There was no report. <br />101 <br />102 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT, MICHAEL GROCHALA <br />103 <br />104 A. Consideration of Resolution No. 04-12, Approving Variance to Allow Accessory Building <br />105 Encroachment into the Front Yard Setback, Joseph Kivel, 6262 Otter Lake Road, Tanda <br />106 Gretz <br />107 <br />108 City Planner Smyser summarized the Staff report, indicating Staff recommends approval of the <br />109 request. <br />110 <br />111 Councilmember Carlson asked how long the applicant has owned the property, and if this is a unique <br />112 situation. <br />113 <br />114 City Planner Smyser stated he could not speak to the length of ownership, but he has not experienced <br />115 another property this close to the right-of-way with such limited options. He stated he can recall a <br />•16 house being built close to the right-of-way line, but to have an existing house without a garage is <br />117 unique. <br />118 <br />119 Mr. Kivel stated he has lived there about two years, and he has explored other places to put a garage, <br />120 however there are none. <br />121 <br />122 Councilmember Dahl moved to adopt Resolution No. 04-12, approving a variance to allow accessory <br />123 building encroachment into the front yard setback, with the following condition: <br />124 <br />125 1. The applicants, their successors, and assigns are hereby notified that should Otter Lake <br />126 Road expand by ten feet or less, neither the City and/or road authority will pay <br />127 compensation to the property owners for severance damages due to their encroachment <br />128 in the setback area. <br />129 <br />130 Councilmember Reinert seconded the motion. <br />131 <br />132 Councilmember Carlson stated she looks at variances more strictly than some do, and that she has <br />133 been consistent. She indicated that in this case she has two concerns. She stated five feet from the <br />134 right-of-way is very close. In 1979, when the lot was separated this situation was created, and she <br />135 thinks they are creating another situation now. She also sees a safety factor with a garage that close to <br />136 the right-of-way. She indicated she is concerned about Anoka County's comments about right -of - <br />137 way management, which states they may be asking Lino Lakes to consider their own right-of-way for <br />138 trails and paths. She stated she will vote no. <br />039 <br />3 <br />