Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />JULY 17, 2000 <br />(#2600 BRIAN KERBER, Continued) <br />Kluth stated he would recommend denying this application based on no hardship being <br />demonstrated. <br />Nygard commented in his view Hennepin County did not demonstrate a hardship cither. <br />Kerber stated that was one example he was going to raise. <br />Stoddard stated he would like to sec the size of the building reduced somewhat. <br />Kerber indicated he would be willing to reduce the size of the pole bam to 60' by 36\ which <br />amounts to 2,160 square feet. <br />Smith commented she would be okay with the 2,160 square feet, with relocation of the two-stall <br />garage being further back on the lot but outside the 26' setback from the wetland. Smith noted <br />if the Applicant owned an additional two-tenths of an acre, he would be allowed the next larger <br />size building. <br />Kerber stated he would be willing to move the two-stall garage back as far back as possible. <br />Stoddard commented he would be agreeable to the 2,160 square foot building. <br />Lindquist indicated he would not be in favor of voting for a building that is in c.xccss of what is <br />permitted by City Code due to the precedent that it may set. <br />Kluth commented he w ould not also not be in favor of voting in support of a pole bam in excess <br />of what is permitted due to the precedent that would be set despite the vote by the City Council on <br />the Hennepin County application. <br />Smith moved, Nygard seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2600, Brian <br />Kerber, 740 Orchard Park Road, granting of a variance to permit construction of a <br />pole barn no greater than 2,160 square feet, and to grant a variance to permit relocation <br />of the two-stall garage within the side street lot line, with the understanding that the <br />Applicant will relocate the garage as far back as possible and still remain outside of the <br />26* wetland setback to allow the garage to be more closely aligned with the proposed new <br />accessory structure. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 2, Lindquist and Kluth Opposed. <br />Lindquist indicated he voted in opposition to the motion because no hardship inherent to the land <br />has been demonstrated. <br />Kluth stated he is in agreement with Lindquist. <br />Smith commented the decision by the City Council on the Hennepin County matter did not affect <br />her vole on this application. <br />PAGE 15