My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 10232017
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2017
>
PL PACKET 10232017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/24/2017 8:07:37 AM
Creation date
10/17/2017 3:16:49 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes <br />September 25, 2017 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />question was regarding impervious. Ms. Rothstein stated she has not researched that but 1 <br />believes they are currently at 35%. 2 <br /> 3 <br />Commissioner Larson asked if there is a minimum setback for the power company to run 4 <br />power lines through the back yard. Ms. Rothstein stated only if there is an easement. The 5 <br />survey does not show an easement. 6 <br /> 7 <br />David and Mary Friend, Applicants, stated they built the house last spring and this is their 8 <br />first year in the house. The deck they are proposing does not equal a patio. The house was 9 <br />built quite large and it takes a large portion of the lot and it was constructed with the plan to 10 <br />have a deck of that size constructed. A six-foot deck is more of a walkway. The options that 11 <br />were given for a detached deck makes it not very usable. There are other structures in the 12 <br />yard. There is a six-foot privacy fence. He knows there are other decks in St. Anthony 13 <br />Village that are as big as the one they are planning. He asked what would be a reasonable 14 <br />size deck that would be acceptable. Ms. Friend stated they worked with the contractor to 15 <br />come up with a plan that would be suitable per the City Code. A stand-alone deck would be 16 <br />absurd and would be a detriment to the house. 17 <br /> 18 <br />Commissioner Foster asked if they constructed the home. Mr. Friend stated they did. 19 <br />Commissioner Foster asked if they had any conversations with the contractor regarding 20 <br />setback requirements. Mr. Friend stated part of it was financial at the time they could not 21 <br />afford to add the deck. They wanted to get the interior done. They were more concerned 22 <br />about the front setback and whether it was appropriate for the neighborhood. They 23 <br />constructed a one-story house as a two story would not fit as well in the neighborhood. The 24 <br />builder bought the site and the Friends contracted with that builder. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Chairperson Gondorchin closed the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. 27 <br /> 28 <br />Commissioner Foster stated the request does not meet the requirements for a variance and he 29 <br />would not support the request. 30 <br /> 31 <br />Commissioner Papatola stated he is sympathetic with the desire to have a deck. The Planning 32 <br />Commission has looked at setbacks in the past but they were minimal. He would not be in 33 <br />favor of granting the setback. 34 <br /> 35 <br />Motion by Chairperson Gondorchin, seconded by Commissioner Papatola to recommend 36 <br />denial of the request for a 17.5-foot variance to build a deck 7.5 feet from the property line at 37 <br />3113 Edward St per the Criteria for and Consistency with Criteria for Variance Approval not 38 <br />being met. 39 <br /> 40 <br />Motion carried 7-0. 41 <br /> 42 <br />Chairperson Gondorchin noted this will come before the City Council at their October 10, 43 <br />2017 Meeting. 44 <br /> 45 <br />IV. STAFF REPORTS – NONE. 46 <br />3
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.