05-26-1987 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 2 Planning Commission Meeting May 26. 1987 . Discussion was held on the hobby of Mr. Elliott. Neighboring property owners have stated complaints and concerns that Elliott is running a business and has numerous vehicles coming and going from his property. Mr. Elliott insisted that what he does is strictly a hobby. Discussion continued on the number of accessory buildings permissible. Chairman Wilson opened the public hearing. Brian Anderson. a neighbor to Mr. Elliott. stated that Mr. Elliott has a lot of nice equipment and does not see the building as a problem. Buster Erickson of 21321 Concord stated that to him there does not seem to be a business on the property. Lavern Canobe of 21424 Concord questioned whether or not Mr. Elliott is in possession of any sales tax permits from the State of Minnesota for repair of automobiles and also questioned whether Or not the property is in a flood zone. Phil Sackston of 21387 Concord discussed his concern of taking away from the natural look of the meadow in the area. . Jerry Highland of 21431 Concord stated that if the building is permitted. he would like to see the appearance better than that of the current building. Floyd Ostrander questioned the amount of property accessory buildings can cover. Chairman Wilson closed the public hearing. Stephen Rohlf clarified that a business is only allowed as a home occupation and must be approved by the Planning Commission. COMMISSIONER MORTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL or THE REQUEST BY FLOYD ELLIOT FOR A 440 SQUARE FOOT ENCROACHMENT ON THE 1,000 SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM SIZE ALLOWED FOR AN ACCESSORY BUILDING ON LOT 4, BLOCK 1. GREENHEAD 1ST ADDITION BASED ON THE EXISTING ACCESSORY BUILDING AND THE REQUEST DOES NOT MEET THE 5 STANDARDS rOR A VARIANCE. COMMISSIONER KIMBALL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 5. Variance Request by Allan Anderson/Public Hearing . Mr. Allan Anderson of 13216 Islandview Drive was present to request a 17 foot encroachment on the 125 foot minimum frontage requirement on two parcels and an approximately .3 acre encroachment on one parcel and a .4 acre encroachment on a second parcel on the minimum one acre lot size requirement for R-1b/single family non-sewered area. The property affected is legally described as the East 100 feet of the S 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 29. Township 33. Range 26. Sherburne County. Minnesota. It was clarified that the parcel South of Islandview Drive is short on frontage but has an existing house on it. The parcel to the north would be short of frontage but is buildable at the current time. and City water and sewer is proposed for the area in the near future at which time the lots would meet requirments.