Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIU?i MEETING OF JULY 19, 1982 <br />JFAllL ,,- Z- <br />Pane 9 <br />Mr. Roth was not present. Mr George Stodola, Mr. Roth's <br />plant manager, was present for him. <br />Kelley asked how much hardcover would be increased? <br />McDonald asked if Baldur Park was a private road or a <br />City road? <br />Mabusth stated the it was a City road u,> untLI Mr. Boar's <br />property. <br />McDonald stated ri...c these parcels of land were.A't legally <br />combined for tax parcels with a street dividing them. <br />Also she noted that you can't put a garage on a property <br />unless a principal s'-ructure is on the perty also. <br />Mabusth referred to the plat map and combination forms <br />dated 1979 that reflect the combination for tax purposes. <br />Rovegno stated that: the size of the structure seemed more <br />like a house than a garage. He noted the building size <br />of 25' x j2' which is much too large. <br />✓UENTHER ROTH <br />1428 Baldur Park <br />Variance <br />#695 <br />Mr. Stodola stated that the applicant does a lot of wood <br />wr>rk, has a few boats and noted that this is the applicant's <br />summer cottage. <br />McDonald insisted that the lots were not combined and stated <br />that the lot combination form came from the finance division <br />at Hennepin County for tax purposes but that doesn't mean <br />that the lots are legally combined. <br />Mabusth stated that these lots are combined for tax purposes <br />and was completed in 1979 well aftar Baldur Park Road <br />became a Cit road. <br />Goetten a-iain noted the size of this, proposed structure. <br />She felt ttu:3 was much too large for a garage. <br />Kelley felt that the second story was alright but noted <br />that there is a hardcover concern. fie also noted tint <br />there is a swamp behind the proposed structure. fie <br />salt that the neighbors shouldn't have any priblems with <br />the proposed garage because the structure is between the <br />trees. He noted the solar second story which is very <br />attractive. <br />Opheim stated that this proposed garage is in the 0-75' <br />setback and the real issue is the applicant wants a <br />variance, he has sufficient hardships but the structure <br />is much too large. <br />Opheim moved to table Guenther Roth's application with th- <br />suggestion that the applicant considerably reduce the <br />proposed garage and therefore have substantially legs <br />hardcover. <br />Kelley seconded. <br />