Minutes - Council - 07/14/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motion c~d. 'Voting Yes: Mayor Gilbertson, Councilmembers Beyer, Hardin, Peterson and Zimmerman.', Voting No: None. Motion by Councilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Hardin to direct City Staff to prepare ,an oak wilt suppression program for City Council's consideration in September, based upon the rel~tilts of the then completed forestry plan. Motion carried. :Voting Yes: Mayor Gilbertson, Councilmembers Beyer, Hardin, Peterson and Zimmermai~.: VOting No: None. Case /V/: r Request to Appeal Board of Adjustment Decision; case of Tim and ~ Brenda Smith. Zoning Administrator Frolik cited that City Code states that any action of the Board of Adjustment may be app~Iexi~ito the Council if notice of such an appeal is received by the Zoning Administrator within ten dab, s o,f the final action· On May 23, 1991, Tim and Brenda Smith appeared before the Board of Altjhst~ent for a variance to the minimum street frontage requirements. The request was denied. Thl~r, Sn~th's approached City Council during Citizen Input on May 28, 1991. Without benefit of WWritt~n case in the agenda, Council affirmed the decision of the Board of Adjustment· The Smiths gte requesting that Council waive the ten day appeal time frame and review the documented f~actS of their request for a variance. Motion by C.~Oun0.ilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Zimmerman to waive the ten day appeal ti.me frame relating to Tim and Brenda Smith's request for a variance based on the lack of documeff~fion available for City Council review and consideration on May 28, 1991. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gilbertson, Councilmembers Beyer, Hardin, Peterson and Zimmerman. ! Voting No: None. Mr. Jim Nefl[son~ attorney for Tim and Brenda Smith, stated the property was a lot of record in 1977, and until 1979 the City Code did not specify that the requirement of 200 feet was to be the street frontag~ width· Mayor Gilbevtson agreed that it was a lot of record prior to the time that 200 feet was specified as frontage width. City Attorney Goodrich also agreed with Mr. Neilson and advised City Council that the issue of park dedication requirements be delayed until such time that this parcel is platted. Mr. Neilson stated that Mr. and Mrs. Smith are willing to dedicate an easement for the extension of 171st Lane N~W.' Councilmeraber Hardin expressed a concern regarding the extension of 171st Lane N.W. through both adjoimng parcels belonging to the Smith's. Mr. Neilson COnsulted with Mr. and Mrs. Smith. They agreed to dedicate a road easement through both parcels. Motion by Coimcilmember Hardin and seconded by Mayor Gilbertson to adopt Resolution ~g92-07- 169 rescindiffg Findings of Fact 4ff)298 and adopting Findings of Fact//0316 in response to an appeal of the ~e~al for a variance to street frontage reqmrements on P.I.N. 10-32-25-11-0001 amended as ff011oWs: Item #10 shall state "That if granted, the variance will not be materially detrimental.,.'~; and add proposed findings No. 12 through 15 as follows: #12. That the applicant has requestoai- aCCess to the subject property from the only location where street frontage is City Council/July 14, 1992 Page 6 of 11