11-21-00 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Approved Minutes New Brighton Planning Commission Regular Meeting - November 21, 2000 7:30 p.m. Call to Order Larry Baker, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Roll Call Present: Larry Baker, Jim O’Brien, , Jeff Schopf, David Schmitz Paul Zisla Absent: Norm Schiferl : Also Present Cary Teague, City Planner Steve Larson, City Council Liaison A moment of silence was held to honor Mike Livingston who recently passed away. Livingston was a valued member of the Planning Commission and community and will be greatly missed. City Planner Cary Teague has accepted a position as Principle Planner at the City of Minnetonka. The Commissioners noted Teague’s contributions to the Commission. Approval of Minutes to approve the minutes of the October 17, 2000, Planning Motion by Schiferl, seconded by O’Brien, Commission meeting. 5 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried. Report on Council Actions Larson explained that the Council made decision to not implement the Franchise Fee. Agenda Review The agenda was adopted as written. Public Hearings Teague presented a request by Orville and Evelyn Holmbo for Minor Subdivision and Lot Width Variance for 1654 Valerie Lane. The proposed widths for the two properties would be 65.71 and 72.26 feet wide. The existing home was constructed on the northern part of the parcel with the plan for future creation of a second lot. The City Engineer reviewed the grading plan and did not find any negative impact to adjacent properties. The resident to the east submitted a letter to the City stating no objection to the proposal. If the City denies the request it would deny the land owner use of the property (construction of a second home), that was originally intended or perceived by the property owner. However, the applicant never paid assessments for both lots for road improvements, utilities, and stub connections for sewer and water. The City has granted similar lot width variances, however, the Council did deny a lot width variance within this neighborhood. In that case, the property did not have direct access to a public street, and the width of the site was narrower than the proposed new lot. However, it is similar in that no assessments were paid to assume future creation of an additional lot. Because the new lot meets the minimum lot size and the grading will have no negative impacts on the adjacent property, staff recommends approval subject to conditions. I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\MINUTES\2000\11-21-00.WPD