Laserfiche WebLink
LIGATION NO. 1750ICE OP COONCIL ACTIONe of Notice: 9/17/92Daryl E. Hanson3841 Thomas Avenue SouthMinneapolis, MN 55410B5 For 0 Against <br />additional time to reduce the <br />ought with original proposal. <br />taff has enclosed the staff <br />Ll*s action at the September <br />town starting September 21st <br />presenting your application <br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETINGHELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992ZONING FILE #1748 - CONT.Butler felt there were a coupleof applications before them tonight where the applicants were caught between two groups of Planning Commission members. She felt applicants that complied with the directives of the Planning Commission should be recognized for <br />doing so. <br />It was moved by Butler, seconded by Jabbour, to direct staff to <br />draft a resolution approving setback variances for Application <br />#1748 for Robert and Rita Hovland of 1245 North Arm Drive, <br />approving a 15’ side setback from the north lot I ine and a 13’ <br />setback from the south lot line. Ayes 5, nays 0. <br />(#5) #1750 CHARLES & SHIRLEY PYLE, <br />3548 IVY PLACE - <br />VARIANCES <br />Charles and Shirley Pyle and Daryl Hanson were present. <br />Mabusth explained this application was also reviewed at both the <br />July and August Planning Commission meetings. She noted the revised <br />proposal includes additional removal of 75-250’ hardcover at 172 <br />s.f., and the 663 s.f. roof structure originally proposed has been <br />reduced to 374 s.f. She noted the real issue for this proposal is <br />the lot coverage. Lot coverage was originally proposed at 24.5% <br />and has been reduced to 21.5%. The Planning Commission recommended <br />approval based on lot coverage be held at 18%, which would mean the <br />applicants would have to give up either the roof structure or the <br />family room addition. <br />Butler stated here Is another situation where the applicants were <br />given directives from the Planning Commission and came back with <br />a proposal and were denied. <br />Goetten felt that does not mean that the vote should have been <br />changed. <br />Jabbour agreed with Butler. He expressed concern about residents <br />exerting energy and money on revised plans and the City does not <br />act In good faith. <br />Goetten stated the lot Is small and has excessive amounts of <br />hardcover. She asked the applicants if there were any other areas <br />where they could reduce hardcover.