My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
07/11/2002
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Board of Adjustment
>
Minutes
>
2000's
>
2002
>
07/11/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/6/2025 3:47:04 PM
Creation date
5/5/2003 3:48:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Document Title
Board of Adjustment
Document Date
07/11/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
1) The inability to create a parcel that will meet the new code is partially a self-created hardship, <br /> due to the fact that the applicant previously dedicated right-of-way as part of the Echo Ridge <br /> Estates subdivision. <br />2) It is possible for the applicant to create a lot that meets the 2.5 acre minimum proposed under <br /> the new code and that also meets all of the required setback minimums for the existing <br /> homestead. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt noted that the public hearing was continued to tonight's meeting so there is no <br />need to open it. He stated that he recognizes staff's "picture" but would like to talk about the <br />"big picture" and what will happen to the west. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon explained if the variance is approved, staff would request that a 66 <br />foot right-of-way be dedicated. The applicant would not be required to construct the road at this <br />time. He noted the larger parcels to the east that could potentially be served. He advised that <br />Mr. Longfield has objected to that recommendation. Principal Planner Trudgeon noted it is this <br />property that is to be divided, not the property to the north or south, so this is the property that <br />the City needs the easement from. If the dedication is not required, then a variance would be <br />needed since that is required by City code. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt invited interested parties to address the Board. <br /> <br />There was none. <br /> <br />Motion by Chairperson Nixt, seconded by Board Member Reeve, to close the public hearing. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Board Members Reeve, Brauer, Kociscak, and <br />Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: Board Members Johnson and Sweet. <br /> <br />The public hearing closed at 7:11 p.m. <br /> <br />Board Business <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt called the Board of Adjustment meeting back to order at 7:11 p.m. <br /> <br />Board Member Kocicsak stated he agrees with staff's recommendation, noting this situation is of <br />the applicant's making. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked when the existing house was built. <br /> <br />Mr. Longfield, applicant, stated he built it eight or nine years ago and it was part of the original <br />subdivision. He stated the 35-acre parcel to the south was landlocked so they gave up the <br />property since they did not need an access to their house. <br /> <br />Board of Adjustment/July 11, 2002 <br /> Page 3 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.