Laserfiche WebLink
BOARD BUSINESS <br /> <br />Case <br /> <br />Request for a variance from front-yard setback <br /> requirements and accessory structure heiQht limits; <br /> case of Steve Pinewski. <br /> <br />Mr. Steve Pinewski came in several minutes after the Board began <br />discussing the request. <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer was under the impression that a lot of this size could <br />construct an agricultural Dui]ding without a permit because <br />agricultural uses are allowed in a residential zone. Because of <br />the size and location of the lot, he had no problem with the <br />request. Chairman Hendrlksen also spoke in favor of the request, <br />believing the height limitation was done fairly and should not be <br />changed. He also felt some consideration should be given when a <br />principal structure Is built that far away from the road. <br />Mr. Zimmerman felt they should look at the accessory structure not <br />being higher than the principal structure and that it be made of <br />the same material as the house. He also thought the height <br />requirement was basically intended for 2 1/2-acre and smaller <br />parcels. <br /> <br />The Board proceeded to review the proposed Findings of Fact. <br /> <br />MOTION by LaDue, Seconded by Deemer, Item 2, strike "That the <br />Applicant appeared before the Board of Adjustment" so that it reads <br />'"A Public Hearing was held by the Board of Adjustment pursuant to <br />Section 170.013G..." Motion carried unanimously (Absent: Bawden, <br />Terry). <br /> <br />MOTION by Deemer, Seconded by Thorud, Item 14, modify the last <br />line so it reads "...accommodate the size of accessory structure <br />permitted by City Code." Motion carried unanimously (Absent: <br />Bawden, Terry). <br /> <br />MOTION by Deemer, Seconded by Thorud, Item 15, "is". (That the <br />variance is necessary...) Motion carried unanimously (Absent: <br />Bawden, Terry). <br /> <br />MOTION by Deemer, Item 16, "do". (That the special conditions do <br />result from actions of the Applicant.) Motion dies for lack of a <br />Second. <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer felt the special conditions do result from the actions <br />of the Applicant assuming he built the house that far back from the <br />road. Mr. LaDue felt if that is the case, then there is no basis <br />for granting the variance. Mr. Thorud said in looking at all the <br />conditions, some of them, such as drainage, do not result from the <br />actions of the applicant. <br /> <br />Ramsey Board of Adjustment/December 6, 1990 <br /> Page 3 of 5 <br /> <br /> <br />