1979-01-24 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

January 24, 1979 Page 4 ,A~~Commiesion Member Burmeieter asked if the developer would coneider. putCing v ,in ~uet one R-2 lot and bringinE the others up to aode. Mr. Viella replled ` that thare would be a problem with land useage and coet. Commiaeion Member Foee etated he felt the plat was laid out as best ae poseible for the piece of land. He added that the R-2 lots do meet the area requirementa, which are not that eaey to meet, an~ that he feels it would be impoesibla to aak the developer to change tha R-2 loce. He aleo pointed out that the Metro Council had juet iaeued a letter recommend- ing smaller lote in the £uture. He aleo etated that he would agree that a etudq ehould be made ae to the affect of drainage on the other properties, MSP (Fose-Fedor) to recommend approval of the preliminary plat ae aub- mitted, dated January 19, 7.979, for Bayport Acres and further, thal• Lote 5 and 6 be rezoned from R-1 tu R~2 and that a atudy be required at the expense of the developer from the City's engineering firm to deFine the impact of the proposed development on the area. U~on City aati.ef.action of, the drainzge impact, and impr.ovement (if necessaryj, a developmAnt a~ree- ment ehculd be entar.ed into, in~luding the drainage coneideratione. A variance Eor the 82.5' Lront~~~e on the lots shall be granted, oX eabject ~ to the elanning Commisoion ataenQing che presonti ~xdinance for ~ ayeo , intErior lota leeo than 85 feet. 1 nay ~ 1 abetain; Commission Member Glazer etated lie was abetai.ning ae he atill felt the ~ plan to coneolidate Lote 5 and 6 and borraw ehe 8.8 feet from the late ; ~ould accomp.lieh both bringing the eight lota intn cunformit~ with the existing code for fronta~e and provide eome breathing epace for the r kennel. He added thae he did agree that Lote S and 6 would 6,ave Co be ; R-2 because of their proximity to Mounds 41ew Square. ~ ~ Commisaion Member Burmeiater stated that ehe had voted againet the motion ! as ehe did not feal the applicant has ehown a hardehip for the variance ~ for lot frc~x~tage. ~ Commiseion Member. Foes pointed out that with 19,000 aquare foot lota in todeye merket, they aell for $7.7-18,000 mini.m.wn and that if, th.e lot ei.ze wae incrAaeed, they would be brought up to at leeet $20,OUu', ~^.hich wou7.d create a hardahip for the builder as a higher priced home would have to be,puC on the 1ate. Commieeion Member BurmeisCer replie3 thae the Planning Coffiniseione's concern ie not with coet but rathex that the devcloper adherea to the code. She added that the developer couZd get the additional 8 f.eet he n~eds to bring the loke up to code. Commiasion Member Foae replied that the ~ob of. the Planning Comraiaeion is to provide a variety of aptions to developers wtthin various prtce ranges. Commiseion Member Burmeiater added that ehey ati11 cuuat eCay with3n code. Oiticial Rose pointed out that the developer could come Zu Lot eitiglr aubdivieiona and would meEt code, but recoamie~.ded that the plat ba ~pproved all at once which would provide a better developmant picture ~nd would require a development agreement.