09/07/93 Reconvened - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

in size and 500 feet in width does not require City Approval, and consequently the City is not entitled to ~ dedication on subdivisions it has no authority over. 2) If the City were entitled to park dedi¢~i0n, the Parks and Utilities Coordinator recommended the acquisition of property for the continuance of the trail in a east west direction along the north side of the County ditch and trail right-of-way pantllel to Hwy. #47, which is estimated at approximately 9 acres. 3) The intent of the minimum lot width requirement of 200 feet of street frontage is to provide safe and orderly access to the parcel, especially in emergency conditions. The City Attorney advised that meeting the minimumlot width requirement at a public road other than that which is proposed to provide access to the property does not meet the intent of the ordinance, and that in order to construct a dwelling on alot that does not meet that intent should be reviewed by the City in the form of a variance. Ms. Frolik stated that the Parks and Utilities Coordinator discussed with Marshall Williams the possibility of contributing park dedication at this time with the advantage being that he would no longer have to pay taxes on that property. Also, it would be a selling point to have park dedication already addressed when Mr. Williams decides to subdivide or sell the property. The Board reviewed approvals and denials of similar requests. Chairperson Hendriksen requested that the Board determine the definition of l~l~parcel. Jerry Green of Edina Realty, representing Mr. Williams, described the existing parcel. Board Member Deemer stated the parcel should be viewed as under contiguous ownership, which would include all 110 acres of Mr. Williams' land. Ms. Frolik explained that Mr. Williams' property consists of three PINs, and each PIN is entitled to a building permit. She stated that to address just the variance, the parcel of record that applies is shaded on page 8 of the agenda. Board Member Deemer stated that parcel has access onto Highway #47 and there is no hardship. The Board proc~ to review the findings of fact. Motion by Bom'd Member Deemer to modify #2 to read "That the subject property is zoned R-1 Rural Residential md is approximately 110 acres in size." The motion died for lack of a second. The Board w~ still in disagreement as to whether the subject property is described by the PIN or by the parcel under contiguous ownership, therefore it was the consensus to deal with it as described in the legal description provided in the proposed resolution. Motion by chairperson Hendriksen and seconded by Board Member Deemer to amend #2 to read "That the subj~t property identified as PIN 14-32-25-13-0003 is zoned R-1 Rural Residential and is approximately 35 acres in size." Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Hendriksen, Board Members Deemer, Bawden, Holland, LaDue, Terry, and Thorud. Voting No: None. Motion by Chairperson Hendriksen and seconded by Board Member Terry to add #2A to read "That the subj~t property is part of an area of approximately 115 acres under single ownership of the applicant." Board of Adjustment/September 7, 1993 Page 2 of 7