Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Minutes of Regular Council Meeting <br />Page four <br /> <br />Miller reviewed his comments in his report of 3/31/77, noting <br />that the rear setback variance would be substantially Increased <br />If house were moved to the north. 'Miller said that Friesen <br />prefers as wide a separation from house on north lot as possible; <br />wants to utilize view of park to the east (Sampson Park) and wants <br />to garden on the north portion of his lot. <br /> <br />April II, 1977 <br /> <br />After discussion, Crichton moved, seconded by Hanson, that Council <br />approve a front set-back variance of 6' (34' from front property <br />lIne), and a rear set-back variance of 18' (12' from rear property <br />line). Motion carrIed unanimously. <br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />Mr. FrIesen was advised of the potentIal Increase In use of the <br />pedestrlanway adjacent to hIs rear property line, which he saId <br />would not be objectionable. <br /> <br />Case No. 77-12. Variance for Garage - Richard Paulzlne. 1854 Grant <br />Road <br />MTTTer referred Council to a diagram of the existing house, wIth <br />proposed attached two-car garage; noted that lot Is narrow, and a <br />varIance of 5' Is necessary If garage Is to be attached. <br /> <br />Miller reported that this variance does not create.a double .problem; <br />garage on next lot is set back 10' from the lIne. MIller reported <br />that the Planning CommIssion recommends Council approval of the <br />5' variance: polley of the Commission and Council has been to grant <br />variances on substandard width lots. <br /> <br />After review of report from Board of Appeals (4/9/77>, and note <br />from adjacent neighbor, Crichton moved, seconded by Hanson, that <br />Council approve a side set-back variance of 5' for a garage at 1854 <br />Grant Road. Motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />(Hanson stated that he prefers to handle each variance request on <br />Its own merit; not establish a policy for variances as suggested <br />In Planner Report of 3/30/77.) <br /> <br />Calie No. 77-11. Preliminary Plat - Skyline BuIlders . <br />Miller referred CouncIl to his report of 3130/17, noting that nearly <br />all comments have been corrected In revIsed plat (4/11/77). <br /> <br />William Dolan displayed the revIsed plat, noting that the north/ <br />south street has been moved to the East, all wIthIn the boundarIes <br />of the plat: N. S. P. has approved the street locatIon and has <br />advised they wIll have no problems In serving al I lots as proposed. <br />Delan noted that the cul-de-sac has been enlarged to meet the 120' <br />dIameter requirement: 50' wide street Is proposed to better utilize <br />hlph ground for buIlding sites. Dolan advised that Houle (south <br />sIde of cul-de-sac on Valentine Crest Road) has granted Skyline <br />BuIlders an access easement to Lot 8. Mr. Holland (north side of <br />cul-de-sac on ValentIne Crest Road) saId he has not given an ease- <br />ment as of this date. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Crichton noted that Parks Committee wIll consIder the Par.k~Dedlca- <br />tlon at Its meeting on April 12th. Dolan said that the ~.32acres <br />in the Southeast corner of the Plat Is proposed for park dedication; <br />deslrable.that City retain control of this area for drainage. <br />(Woodburn noted that City would have controi whether area Is dedi- <br />cated or not.) <br /> <br />Highway noise was discussed. Dolan suggested that bermlng would <br />probably be the only solution. <br /> <br />In revIew of plat, Woodburn noted that a 30' front setback Is In- <br />dicated (Ord. requires 40'). Dolan requested approval of the 30' <br />front setbeck on the cul-de-sac street; 40' from County Road F can <br />be provided. <br /> <br />Dolan reported that RIce Creek Watershed District will consider the <br />plat at Its meeting this week. <br /> <br />-4- <br />