Laserfiche WebLink
��� �v rr CD✓,1 f T� Z�' S -O <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />A resident from Town Line Road presented a petition <br />requesting the City to impose a year around load limit <br />and reduce the speed limit on Town Line Road. <br />ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: <br />#1022 CHARLES A. SCHALL <br />605 PARR LANE <br />VARIANCE <br />RESOLUTION <br />Charles and Marilyn Schall were present for this matter. <br />Their contractor, Marty Bethke was also present. <br />Applicants request to constrL, . a new attached garage <br />with a bedroom above the garage. The structure is <br />proposed to be 7.7 feet from the side lot line, 3.5 feet <br />from the roadway, includes a net reduction from 4.1% to <br />2.5% hardcover in 0-75', and a net increas in hardcover <br />from 48.8% to 52.2% in 75-250'. The structures is <br />proposed to be at a peak height 3' lower than the <br />existing house. <br />City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this <br />request was originally presented in June, tabled on <br />behalf of the neighbors so that their attorney could <br />review it, subsequently tabled on behalf of the <br />applicants so their attorney could review. Applicants <br />requested that the matter be placed on this meetings <br />agenda and were advised that there would be *our Council <br />members present. <br />Mr. Schall stated that the neighbors (Stan & Betty Rudd) <br />have not objected to the proposed garage but are opposed <br />to the additional living space above. He stated that <br />they have demonstrated sufficient hardship to support <br />the need for an additonal second story bedroom. He <br />noted that considerable planning has been done and this <br />is the best plan they can work out. <br />Stan & Betty Rudd, 601 Park Lane, and their Attorney, <br />Jim McKinnon, were present. <br />Jim McKinnon stated that based on comments made at the <br />last meeting, he felt that Council was trying to balance <br />the equities between the desires of the applicants and <br />the impact to the neighbors. He stated that from a <br />legal standpoint, the Council has no legal right to <br />reach that argument until they first find that there is <br />a undue hardship with respect to the variance. Based on <br />his legal research under Minnesota law, an "undue <br />hardship" involves deprivation of the beneficial use on <br />ones property unless the variance were granted <br />(example: a need for a bedroom within a house with no <br />