CC 07-12-1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of Regular Council Meeting .July 12, 1982 Psge Five Miller noted that site changes, other than painting, normal main- tenance and repair, would require an amendment to the Planned Unit Development permit; suggested the Certified Survey(Develop- ment Agreement) be considered the official drawing and be attached to the permit. Hicks moved to waive the normal PUD submission requirements and approve issuance of Planned Unit Development Permit for duplex use of the two proposed lots (Survey, dated May.18, 1982), subject to the follow- ing conditions: a. The property to be used for duplex only. If the existing structure is removed or destroyed, the individual lots of the Planned Unit Development shall not be used for single-family residences or any other use permitted in the district with- out City Council approval. . b. The exterior of the duplex structure shsll not be physically altered without City Council approval through the PUD smendment process. Painting and normal maintenance and repair shall be excluded from this requirement. c. The exterior design and appearance of the sep- arate dwelling units shall be treated in a uniform manner. This shall include items such as paint color, shingles, window treat- ment, walk and driveway surfacing snd yard fencing. Motion .carried unanimously (4-0). Case No. 82-13, Lot Split and Variances - 1893 Beckmsn Avenue Council was referred to Planning memo (6-28-82), Bosrd of Appeals report (7-1-82), Planning Commission recommendations (minutes of 7-7-82) and to transparancies of the 150' x 150' lot which appli- cant proposes to split into two 75' x 150' lots. Miller noted that the lots exceed the 11,000 sq. ft area require- ment, but both lots will require width variances (corner lot 20', easterly lot 10'). Miller noted that the ordinance also requires structure to conform with prevailing setback in the ares, but not more than 60'. Miller explained that the prevailing setback on Beckman Avenue and New Brighton Road is 50'-60' and is fairly consistent in the area; noted this setback would reduce the building envelope to about a 10' width; noted that the building envelope at a 40' setback would be marginal, but would be buildable. . Mrs. Teien ssid her builder assured her that a house can be built 30' in width; said she probably can't msintain the property unless she can sell the proposed lot. Miller said the split as shown places the existing house about 9' from the side property line _ could reduce the eas terly lot to 71' (5' setbac.k), which would in- crease the width variance on that lot, but decrease the width var- iance on the corner lot. Mill~ noted thst a 75' lot width is not uncommon in the area. House across Beckman Avenue is setback about 50' from New Brighton Road, but only about 20' from Beckman right-of-way. After discussion of various options, including the possibility of a zero side lot line, a 5' side setback and 40' front setback, John- son moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council table its action pending additional review by Planner for Council's consideration. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). -5-