01-20-1987 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

m Zoning F.le #1090 January 16, 1987 Page 2 of 3 C. Regarding existing garage that was to be removed as part of the original Holly Acres subdivision, applicant's attorney states in ^his letter of 1/7/87 that the estate agrees to remove said garage. John Hollander has stated that he hopes to accomplish this as socri as possible. He also indicates he wishes to build a new garage, and staff notes that since proposed Lot 2 is in effect a "through lot", any detached accessory structures requires a conditional use permit review per Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 10. Also, no building permits can generally be issued for outlets, ^ and a stipulation of the original subdivision was that no permits accessory or principal structures on Outlot B would be issued until completion of its subdivision. Staff recommends that part of Planning Commission's recommendation to Council be removal of the existing non-conforming garage prior to final plat approval (more strict than 11/11/86 memo). Staff further recommends that applicant apply for a conditional use permit for location of a new detached garage on proposed Lot 2, such permit to be issued only if conditional use permit approval is granted and after the subdivsiion is filed with Hennepin County. D. Regarding existing access to County Road 6 that was to be removed as part of original subdivision. Letter of 1/7/87 indicates the ©state agrees to reinoval of this access driveway. staff recommends that the required access removal permit be acquired by the applicant from Hennepin County Department of Highways (Dave Zetterstrom, 935-3381) and that the access be eliminated by regrading prior ro final plat approval (this is a more strict time frame than recommended in 11/11/86 memo). E. Regarding the existing barns on proposed Lot 2, staff has not niade a formal hazardous building inspection of the barns, however the previous staff recommendation (Item 4, Page 4 of 11/11/86 memo) to require their removal still stands. John Hollander notes that he does not agree to removal of the barns, on the basis that a) he needs the storage space; and b) the costs of removal are prohibitive and would negate a great share of his realized inheritance. Of course, this is his problem. VJe suggest he contact his local fire department to see whether they would consider burning the barns. p Staff recommendations per memo of 11/11/86, specifically Items 1, 6', 7, and 8, still apply. Staff feels per recommendtion 7, that since L -red at 5C from County Road 6 to 200' if it meets 200' measured at 50 from the private road where actual access is designated. However, it planning Commission recommends the change it is certainly feasi e an will amount to only 0.02 acre trade-off. r* * !i !i