Laserfiche WebLink
-6- <br /> The Council finds, as did the Planning Commission, that: <br /> • 1 . The removal of the existing non-conforming free standing sign in front of the <br /> building seems to be a good trade-off for granting the variances; <br /> 2. The hardship would be to turn down a project such as this one which would be <br /> such an asset to the community when compared to the existing structure; <br /> 3. Granting these variances could not be expected to be detrimental to abutting <br /> properties; and <br /> 4. The three conditions which require satisfaction appear to have been met with the <br /> proposal as presented. <br /> Motion carried unanimously. <br /> Commissioner Bjorklund read the motion recommending Council approval of the lot <br /> split and variances necessary to develop two lots on the property owned by Elizabeth <br /> Johnson, 3601 Stinson Boulevard. He told. the.Council the only neighbor .present for <br /> the hearing had appeared to have left that meeting .satisfied with the type of home <br /> Joe Mezzenga had indicated he might build on the new lot. <br /> Councilman Ranallo noted that, if this house is built with the garage fronting on <br /> the street, it would be similar to another house like it on Edward where he <br /> perceives there could be a problem with snow storage. The Councilman was concerned <br /> that, with the existing elevations in that neighborhood, there could be some <br /> serious water problems as empty lots are developed. <br /> Mr. Hamer indicated he also perceives the possibility that smaller backyards could <br /> accentuate drainage problems and told the Council he is closely monitoring the <br /> grade plans for all new construction in that area. <br /> Motion by Councilman Marks and seconded by Councilman Ranallo to grant the request <br /> from Elizabeth Johnson, 3601 Stinson Boulevard N.E. , for subdivision without <br /> platting and a variance to allow the split of an existing 50 X 239.25 foot lot <br /> fronting on Stinson Boulevard and Roosevelt Street N.E. , into two lots which <br /> would be approximately 50 X 120 feet in size and a total of 6,000 square feet <br /> each, where"_the Gity Ordinance requires 75 foot frontage and a total area of 9,000 <br /> square feet, for a single family dwelling, which would result in the retention of <br /> the existing residence fronting on Stinson Boulevard and the creation of another <br /> buildable lot fronting on Roosevelt Street N.E. <br /> The Council finds, as did the Planning Commission, that: <br /> 1 . Another single family home could be added to the City stock; <br /> 2. There have been ample examples of precedents of this type permitting similar <br /> size lots to be built in the City, and in that particular neighborhood; <br /> 3. There is some indication that historically this property might have been <br /> divided into two entities in the past; and <br /> 4. All conditions which are required by law to be satisfied affirmatively have <br /> • been done so. <br /> Motion carried unanimously. <br />