Laserfiche WebLink
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 20, 1987 PAGE 4 <br />The proposed lots are several feet above the minimum building <br />elevation for Lake Elmo. <br />6. Lake Frontage <br />Each lot has at least 150 feet of lot width at the lakeshore as <br />required by Shoreland Regulations. <br />7. Road. Frontage <br />Each lot has at least 125 feet of frontage on a public street as <br />required by subdivision regulations. <br />8. Ponding <br />The VBWD has generally exempted single lot subdivisions from the <br />ponding requirements. <br />9. Driveway <br />The driveway for the existing house is located on the proposed new <br />lot. This driveway should be relocated.. It was Mr. Howell's <br />Intention to relocate the driveway to the northside of the <br />property. <br />10. Recommendations <br />The concern is that this subdivision would take a presently <br />conforming parcel and create at least one non -conforming lot size. <br />The City has usually enforced the lot dimensional requirements of <br />Lake Elmo; for example, Gordon Lundholm and Matt Northrup lot <br />splits. The waiver of platting requirements is a policy decision <br />which has not been uniformly enforced. Sovereign platted, but <br />Lundholm did not. <br />Mr. Howell stated that if you look at ten adjacent properties to <br />his, there is not one that conforms to 1.5 acres. He added., that <br />half of them would be smaller than the gross lot size that he has <br />proposed for his lot split. Mr. Howell would like to stay in Lake <br />Elmo and enjoys the lake frontage, but the home he has now is not <br />adequate for him and his purposes. They have a. family foster home <br />for girls and are at a maximum now of seven girls. To add on to <br />his home would be unadvisable. The house was built in 1927 and <br />has very nice built-in hutches and old imperfect glass. The <br />blending of the two architectua.l styles would be objectionable to <br />him and detract from the existing house. The cost to duplicate <br />the architecture in the home today would be very expensive. <br />Councilman Johnson reminded Mr. Howell that a financial hardship <br />does not constitute a hardship. In regard to the discussion about <br />whether you could buy another lot at what price and still live on <br />the lake is not germane to this property. <br />Paul Larson, 2041 Lake Elmo Avenue, asked where Mr. Howell got his <br />figures for lot sizes because his property is 130 feet wide, not <br />99 feet wide. The Wright property has approximately three acres, <br />and the Adkins have a large piece of property, so there are lots <br />