Laserfiche WebLink
1 PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> 2 MAY 19 , 1992 <br /> 3 PAGE 16 <br /> 4 <br /> 5 <br /> 6 B. James Sarna and William Vogt ( Stop-N-Shop Suyerette) , <br /> 7 3813 Stinson Boulevard, Sian Variance Research <br /> 8 <br /> 9 The City Manager -advised that this request for a sign <br /> 10 variance has been withdrawn . The owners of the business <br /> 11 stated their intentions to deal with representatives of <br /> 12 Conoco and resolve the problems . <br /> 13 <br /> 14 C. Concept Review - 3821 Foss Road <br /> 15 <br /> 16 Jon Lindberg of ReMax Associates , Inc. owns a three-plex <br /> 17 at 3821 Foss Road. Currently it is a rental property <br /> 18 zoned R=4 . Mr . Lindberg initially proposed subdividing <br /> 19 the property to allow for the building of a four unit <br /> 20 townhome complex. He was advised by staff 'of the <br /> 21 difficulty in subdividing this property. Another option <br /> 22 would be to treat the current and proposed units as <br /> 23 condominiums . If -he chose to do this , a backyard setback <br /> 24 of 59 . 8 feet would be required. From Mr . Lindberg' s <br /> 25 current proposal , a 22 . 3 foot variance would be needed. <br /> 26 <br /> 27 The City Manager s°tated this type of request could be <br /> 28 received from owners of several lots in the City to <br /> 29 accommodate a similar situation and staff would not <br /> 30 recommend this be approved. <br /> 31 <br /> 32 The City Attorney noted this could be done at the present <br /> 33 time by changing the lot line . The property fronts on <br /> 34 Mirror Lake. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Members of the Planning Commission questioned if this is <br /> 37 a Department of Natural Resources lake at the present <br /> 38 time. It was noted that if it is , then the structure must <br /> 39 have a seventy-five foot setback. <br /> 40 <br /> 41 The City Manager advised the owner that he has concerns <br /> 42 with water runoff , drainage and the swail remaining where <br /> 43 it is . <br /> 44 <br /> 45 He told the owner this issue would be discussed as a <br /> 46 concept by the Planning Commission before a variance is <br /> 47 requested. <br /> 48 <br /> 49 Parking requirements would be one space inside and one <br /> 50 space outside. The developer is proposing two spaces <br /> 51 inside and two spaces outside . <br /> 52 <br /> 53 <br /> 54 <br />