My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
VN-196
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
PLANNING
>
Planning
>
Variance Files PLZ 02400
>
VN 101-200
>
VN-196
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/4/2007 10:19:45 PM
Creation date
2/28/2007 2:47:18 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
55
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
-~`~ <br />l <br /> <br />Public Hearings VrI-196. ' <br />Carlson <br />The appplicants,PRr. and .Mrs. Clinton 'Carlson, ~/ Rpt 78-281 <br />were present to answer questions. Mr. Clalson r <br />showed slides of the site in question for <br />subdivision into: two lots and further described' <br />'his plans for use of the lot. <br />Mrs. Carlson, explained-the plan.-for. the house to <br />be built on the lot. <br />Mr. John Campbell,. 1229 12th Avenue N.W.,~spoke <br />in opposition to the variance. <br />James Finley, 1333 12th Avenue NW, spoke in ~` <br />opposition to he variance. <br />Motion by Janecek, seconded by Blomquist to close <br />hearing. <br />5 ayes - 0 Hayes- carried <br />Motion. by Blomquist, seconded by Benke to waive reading <br />the resolution and adopt RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF <br />FACT AND APPROVING VARIANCE APPLICATION VN-196. <br />2 ayes - 3 Hayes (Janecek, Werdouschegg, Senden) - failed <br />Motion by Werdouschegg, seconded by Janecek to <br />direct the staff to prepare a resolution denying <br />-the variance VN-196 and using among others a list <br />of .the findings of -fact to wit: <br />1. .The zoning code in the City of New Brighton <br />requires that in R-1 district the minimum-lot <br />size be 10,000 square feet and have 75 foot width- <br />at the building setback line; <br />2. This application requests variances for less. <br />required-lot width and not having frontage to <br />a.public street; <br />3. The applicant's property is at a substantially. <br />high er elevatior. than the property to the south <br />whereby the construction of a new home as proposed <br />could be detrimental to the property to south in <br />terms of drainage and loss of yard privacy; <br />7:40 - 8:.45 <br />4. Adjacent property owners and neighbors have <br />expressed their strong opposition to granting of these <br />variances; <br />5. While the proposed lots actually exceed the minimium <br />lot area on paper, a large-percentage- of the property <br />f.. ~k.a.~.~.._~ ~ ,;;~~.is below ,the high water., _line , of _ Long Lake; ~ -=z.,..~=:;~w._. ~_ • ~w __~„ <br />6. while the overall lot.. sizes of the proposed .lots <br />are comparable.to•lot sizes in the neighborhood, <br />the proposed. lots wily have the .greater portion of <br />area below the highwater,mark of Long Lake; <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.