Laserfiche WebLink
MIMUTBS OF THE PIAIlHIIiG COMMISSICm TING NAY 15* 1989 <br />I)ZOHIMG PILE «1410-PEIIIEES COMTIMl <br />explained that the applicants were seeking a lot width variance. <br />The standard for the LR-IA, 2 acre zoning district is 200' and <br />the defined width of this lot at the 50' setback from County load <br />15 is only 30'. The applicants will require a 170' variance. <br />Gaffron said that the applicants were required to provide septic <br />testing to show where the house and drainfield sites will be. <br />The site evaluator initially proposed to place two drainfield <br />sites west of the house where the lot has the roost width. <br />However, during the testing, it was determined that there would <br />be room for only one system at that site and additional testing <br />would be needed to find a suitable second alternate site. <br />Gaffron said that the building envelope would be very limited <br />when taking the drainfield sites and setbacks into consideration. <br />Staff is recommending that the building limitations be eased by <br />having a minor subdivision done to add a triangle of the <br />applicants' adjacent property. The lot line rearrangement would <br />increase the building envelope by 80%. The applicants' lot <br />containing their residence has a separate tax identification <br />number and is in excess of 2 acres. The lot line rearrangement <br />would not create any substandard setbacks for the existing <br />principal structure. <br />Chairman Kelley questioned whether this lot had riparian <br />rights? Gaffron replied that the applicants would give up their <br />riparian access to the existing house. <br />Chairman Kelley asked the Prineases if they would object to <br />including the triange of the property with the new lot? Mr. <br />Keith Nelson, Mr. and Mrs. Prineas' Attorney, said that Mr. and <br />Mrs. Prineas pre.erred to proceed with the lot width variance as <br />proposed. He said that the parcel has always existed as is. <br />Secondly, the Prineas's homestead parcel is a bit over 3 acres <br />and any new owner would not require a variance to board a horse. <br />Mr. Nelson said that placing a house further back on the new lot <br />would detract from the existing views of any adjacent property. <br />Kelley said that the Planning Commission was only trying to <br />provide the applicants with an option that would create a <br />sufficient building envelope. He said that the City would not <br />likely approve a variance for constructing a residence on the new <br />lot. Gaffron noted that the designated wetland would take away <br />from the lot area for most zoning purposes and would possibly <br />take away from the zoning requirement for horses. <br />Assistant Planning md Zoning Administrator Gaffron said <br />that the access for this lot is proposed off of County Road 15. <br />The applicants have received approval from Hennepin County for <br />this access. <br />Mr. and Mrs. Robert Stierna, of 1930 Shoreline Drive, <br />indicated that they were concerned about the access. He said <br />that he had a proposed agreement from the previous owners of the <br />applicants' property. The agreement would extinguish an easement <br />that exists along the back 20' of the lot. Mr. Stierna said that <br />the easement extended from the railrod to Arbor Street and runs