My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_960911
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
199x
>
1996
>
pm_960911
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:34:50 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:56:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
9/11/1996
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Planning Commission Meeting Minutes <br />September 11, 1996 <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br />Ayes: <br />Nayes: <br /> <br />Harms, Cunningham, Rhody, Sandstrom, Wilke, Wietecki <br />None <br /> <br />MOTION: Member Wietecki moved, seconded by Member Harms, to recommend that <br />the City Council (by resolution) extend the 60 day review period on Arthur Mueller's <br />request for preliminary and final plat approval for a 6 lot subdivision at 2224 Acorn Road <br />to December 21, 1996. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br />Ayes: <br />Nayes: <br /> <br />Harms, Cunningham, Rhody, Sandstrom, Wilke, Wietecki <br />None <br /> <br />Chairman Wietecki stated the need for correct topography and to complete the drainage <br />plan. <br /> <br />Member Sandstrom asked staff to review the building suitability of each lot. <br /> <br />Member Rhody asked for impacts of adjacent north properties by fill and construction <br />equipment. <br /> <br />6(c) Planning File 2859: Patrick Daulton request for a variance to the shoreland <br />ordinance at 3030 Little Bay Road. <br /> <br />Chairman Wietecki opened the hearing and requested Michael Falk to summarize his <br />written report of 9/11196. The applicant requests a 39 foot setback variance to allow a 36 <br />foot setback. Staff could not find a unique hardship and recommended denial. <br /> <br />Chairman Wietecki asked what is setback of house. (62 feet). <br /> <br />Member Cunningham asked for discussion/details of alternatives or could the pool set <br />back the same distance as the existing non-conforming house. <br /> <br />Member Harms asked for details regarding other pools closer than 75 feet to the lake <br />shore. Falk noted there are no pool variances to date. <br /> <br />Member Rhody stated that the Daulton request regarding excavation of the bay, which <br />changed the setback, has no standing. <br /> <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.