05-14-1990 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Zoning File #1502 May 2, 1990 Page 2 of 3 Exhibit M Exhibit N Exhibit 0 Exhibit ^P.- Exhibit Q Exhibit R Exhibit S Exhibit T Survey/Site Plan Staff Letter to Cook Cook's Report 3/26/90 '■pralH>gae Plans for 1985 Drainage Project Adjacent To North Property Line Amended Drainage Plan Hilbelink Letter of 3/14/90 Letter to Neighbor to North Heikkila Letter (Neighbor to North's Attorney) Review of Application - The Hilbelink variance application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their March 19th and April 16th meetings. The original proposal involved a request for a lot area variance* side setback variance for the proposed residence to Prospect Avenue's lot line and a height and placement variance for a privacy fence proposed along the street lot line on the south side (Prospect Avenue). Please review Exhibit M. The fence variance was conceptually denied by the Planning Commission at their March meeting. The application was tabled pending further review by the City Engineer of the drainage concerns raised by neighbor to the immediate north and to provide an amended drainage plan based on City Engineer's directives. The major concern for drainagae was to minimize impact on the drainage way that existed between the shared lot lines of t''e property to the north and Hilbelink property. Please review the enclosed staff memos for greater detail on this review. Please review Exhibit Q. The amended drainage plan shows drainage being directed predominantly to the catch basin within Briar Street. Neighbor to the north appeared at the April meeting and once again announced that they were willing to dedicate a drainage easement over the drainage way within their portion of the property. Mr. Hilbelink's letter of March 14, 1990 advised that he had no definite building plan for the improvement of the property but advised that because of the substandard lot that he would still ask for the side setback variance. It was his intention to place a house within the defined building envelope designated within Exhibits M and Q. The Planning Commission did not accept this as adequate reason to grant a side setback variance and advised the applicant that their recommendation would deal solely with a lot area variance and that at the time of the final development of this site, that if a side setback variance would be neccessary that this would require additional variance review.