1978-03-22 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ns~~n z2, ie~e Pe~a a at tha last Citl Cwncil meeting, Block 1 wae der~ied hecausfs of Ir.t 4 belonging ~ ~Mr. R~den1uist, along with the autlote on &l.oek 1 and Bla^.k 2. Mr. Haretad etat.ed that t~rc. Ia~senquiat hes agreed to sell the proper.ty neceaeary to nake the lote. Oomniseion MeiSxr ~xmeieter statxl that ehe did mt underatand why a lettps had rat been presentec7 to the City alrsady eayinq ihat the neceasary ]and would ba sold, as it hazl been rec~uested oE Mr. t{arstarl. t4r. Harekad replied that he had not been told a lettcjr wae needed. ~nniseion ManUer Alanct~l questio~ed if the Planning Camiiseian could apprarc+ a subdivisirn oP pmFsrty that was mt even owned by the applicant. Of.ficial Aooe re~litxl ttut he had not x~equeated a letter fraa Mr. Harstad eariier as ttp Posencp~iat'a xere at the public hec~riny atd did mt epeak up againat the sutdiviai~, nnd tha!: I~h. Harstar] had assured him the It~seix~uist's t.ere willing to sell the pro~'ty. He addcid that tlte aubc~ivlsi~ could .mt bo approved witlrnit Mr. :iarstarl punchaeing pmperty Et~n ttte R~senqui.~c's, and that the appmval wauld br~ contilxJent upon aeceipt of e letter fxom the IbsQnguist's and the sale of tlte pm~x:rty. CJfflcial 3~s+~ add~l tliat the Oouhcil was c~c:Pxnei with t~e platting of non-cwitiguous parcels i~ut that the Nunty has stated tli.3t they will apprave the platting of ran-adjoinin4 P~~Y• M~p {Mackeben-E~r) ta xeoamm~d to thd Oouncil apQmval of Kettli Harstad's pre- liml.tiary plat of 10/20/77, revised 1/17f76 and 2/23/7& faz Hlock 1 arrl 731cxJ: 2, „-.,, ~tingait upon a written letter to the City fran the owner of the pmperty oon- i ~tained in ela~c 1, Mr. ~eenquiat, arci m~bject to a final developnent agreement at ~4,~tha time of the signing of t:he Llnal plat. F R1"eB VARi1fr1CE RF7p06,Si' C&' GEOIiL~ II~fE[tIC1S - 7390 SILVER LAI~ ?74T~i7 Official R~se xeportecl that tUe applicant xece~itly l~ought a new hane at 7390 Si,lver Iake Ibad ard has requested to place a horse shoe driveway onto Silver L~ice l~rad, while tl~e [+btmds View dode only allowa one cur.b cut per single fFUn;.ly lot. Official R~ee added that Sec. 40.7, 8j states that single femfly uses sha11 be limitod to one curb cut ~ss per pzoperty unlese, upai applicaticn for a varience of tliie restrlction, the Baar.d of Pdjuabmnt ar~d Apoeal firc]s khat it ie in tha intereat of publlc eafety to waive euch. F[c~ added l•hat Mr. rirerick has provided ~ sketch atnwing the requeated Mree shoe drive, and that the locatim and widths meet oode r3quirenents. [ie also added that Silver Lake Tmad is a heavil,y traveled residential minor arteria'l. Mr. l~ier}.c1c atated that he vmAd like ~ put in the horss shoe drive mainly for ea£ety rnnsrns sr.c1 that he felt tl~e hnrse shoe drive ca~uld nat deter fmn hie property. Osmiseim Manber ~edox nsked if the Plannir~g Ocmniseion had previwesly appLwed a i~ozse elme drive .For ear~eone. tl~airpex~eai Haako replied that there ia a horse eMe drive in Mounde View that hae been in Por sane tin~e. She alsa added thah if the Planning IXmniesioai vms goir~g to apprwe tM req~st, quidelinea ehould be writt.en inbo the ozdinanoe. KS2 (Hurnieister-Glezer) that the Planning Cacmiseirn, Acti.ng as a Boaxd of Rdjusiarent ~d[1d Appaalt3~ grallte Yhe VarlenCe Lequeet oE C~eoxge FlfYerlCice 7390 S5.1Ver Iake Ia~ed for a horse ehoe drive, althatgh the City Cbde tuider ;ec. 90.7, 8j etatJes cmly ot~e curU cut per a~ngle £amily t~atie, Silver Lake St~a3 ie ciesignated ae a mistor arterial ~l,