Laserfiche WebLink
MINLITF.S OF I MF ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MFFTING HFLDON NOVFMBF.R 20, 1995 <br />(#5 - «2088 Winfield Stephens - Continued) <br />Mabusth asked for Planning Commission’s view if the vacation was not part of the <br />application Lindquist said he was of the position that the garage should come down if it <br />is not located in the legal building envelope He m>ted that it was to the benefit of the <br />applicant to priKeed with the vacation of the alley <br />Gardiner said he had olfered a neighbor $2,000 to consider the vacation but had receK-ed <br />no reply. <br />Gardiner asked if the Commission w ould consider option #1. Berg asked where the <br />garage would go <br />Stephens asked if the vacation of the alley could not be done, if the process could proceed. <br />Peterson said the iiaraue would still nt*ed to he addresst‘d <br />Gardiner remarked that he had purchased the property in 1982. and the garage was built <br />before that time <br />Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to table Application #2088 Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />Peterson suggested the applicants pul the burden on the neighbor to determine the <br />drivewav easement. <br />(#6) #195* LOl'IS OBERHACSFR, 2405 DIINV, OODY AVENUE, 1*65 AND 3*77 <br />SHORELINE DR!\ E PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - 9:35-10:02 P.M. <br />The Certificate of Mailing and /MTidavit of Publication were noted. <br />The applicant was represented by Jack Neveaux <br />Mabusth said the application was for a lot line rearrangement and replat of two lots. The <br />original subdiv ision application was filed in 1994 had also included applicant's homestead <br />parcel. The current application includes 3 substandard lots. The property is in the 1/2 <br />acre zoning district Lot I to the west contains 16,500 s.f, and Lot 2 to the east contains <br />20,000 s.f Existing now, according to Mabusth are two boarded up structures, one <br />structure had been removed, and one rental unit structure. <br />Mabusth reported that the applicant seeks approval of lakeshore setback variances for lot <br />I involving a 6' encroachment of lakeshore setback line The structure will be located 10' <br />from street lot line and existing detached garage is 6' into the right-of-way. Both <br />structures would meet the 10' side setback. A timber retaining wall is located in lot 2, and <br />the applicant is willing to remove the wall if able to gain the variances for lot 1. There are <br />no lakeshore decks proposed with new construction plans. <br />• 14 <br />— •___T r.- -*T - A’