02-07-18 PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the orientation of their home so it fronts Thom drive, and 3) still rip off a deck to meet minimum side setbacks[1] speaks to this overdevelopment. These three properties will average .6 acres - with the smallest two are under half an acre and the biggest being largely made up of wetland and need-to-be-constructed retaining ponds. [3] The smallest includes the proposed, smaller, easement and is still 45% easement. Average property size on New Brighton Road from near the corner of E2 ot the train tracks is 1.32 acres.. all but 3 larger than .9 acres (and those are .62,.69 and .81 acres). If you include adjacent properties on Thom adjacent to property the average is 1.25 acres. These would set the new standard for smallest properties by a large margin and be less than 1/3 the size of the average property. While they fit the R-2 minimums, they are too cramped for the area and will negatively impact property values. The planning commission has historically cared about keeping lots similar in size and cramming houses in is not in the best interests for the city. PC 07 005, also involving Richard Kostok, involved creating lots roughly the size we are talking about and was denied at 2015 Thom. ... which has adjacent properties much smaller than 3685 does. Specifically, the commission stated that "Density was not the objective [of the city]" and that "reasonable use exists in its' current state" Further, the current planning commission has said "Given the wetland and protected drainage areas, a significant area of Lots 1 and 2 could not be built on." [1] and Tim, himself, said in a previous application for development that much of the lot [3685] was lift station or wetlands and "to look at the entire square footage was misrepresenting the fact that there was space to build on and[or] there was room to encroach into his back area" [7] Easement: The lift station is oldest in the city - bulit in 1971[4]. Easement is approx 8600 sqft. Both it and the easement have been there well before Tim bought his property. The 2007 attempt to place one additional house on 3685 New Brighton road resulted in the easement potentially shrinking by 2000 square feet. At that time, it was stated from the city engineer that the shrunken easement "may not be sufficient for reconstructing the lift station in the future".[5] Staff review recommended enlarging the easement by 10 feet on the side opposite the proposed vacated area and then noted that only "with the boundary adjustment, the city engineer [and public works director] determined that partially vacating the easement would not impact the function, maintenance, or reconstruction of the lift station."[6] The current proposal shrinks the easement to by about 4000 square feet. That is about twice as much vacated space as was deemed unacceptable last time. It also includes utility lines, driveways, new trees, and an engineer-required retaining wall will be going under, on top of, around, and beside... surely this will result in additional expenses down the road when a rebuild is required. Driveways: