Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CITY OF ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8,1995 <br /> <br />Motion: <br /> <br />Member Wall moved and Member Harms seconded to recommend <br />approval of Kenneth Kath's request for a special use permit for rental and <br />leasing of automobiles at 2611 Hamline Avenue N with the following <br />conditions: <br /> <br />1. That there be a maximum of 5 vehicles for lease on the site. <br />2. That there be indoor display ofthe vehicles only. <br />3. That there be no outside storage of vehicles. <br />4. That there be no vehicle maintenance on the site. <br /> <br />Member Harms questioned if a restriction of hours was necessary. <br /> <br />Chairman Wietecki stated that he would vote for the proposal reluctantly despite the <br />lateness of receipt of materials and the nature of the proposal because it complies with the <br />letter ofthe law. <br /> <br />6. <br /> <br />(d) <br /> <br />Planning File 2730: Judith Bennett request for division of a platted lot at 565 W. <br />County Road B-2. <br /> <br />Chairman Wietecki opened the hearing. <br /> <br />Mike Falk provided background and a description of the proposed lot division. Mr. Falk <br />pointed out that the proposed lot division was anticipated during the construction and <br />subsequent assessment of Sextant Avenue. Water and sewer services have been provided <br />in anticipation of the lot division and a administrative lot division has previously <br />occurred between two adjacent property owners to provide the necessary access to <br />Sextant A venue from the new north lot. The existing single family dwelling will remain <br />on the south lot and a new residence will be constructed on the north lot. Mr. Falk stated <br />that it was staffs recommendation that the Bennett's request be approved based on the fact <br />that both lots exceed minimum lot standards, that no variances would be required for <br />either the existing structures or the new house, which will be built. <br /> <br />Chairman Wietecki questioned if any variance would be required. Falk responded that <br />none would be required. <br /> <br />Member Sandstrom asked for clarification of the previous administrative lot division. <br />Falk explained the administrative lot division process and the administrative lot division <br />that occurred between the Bennett's and the adjacent property owner. <br /> <br />8 <br />