HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/22/00Hastings Planning Commission
May 22nd, 2000
Regular Meeting
Commissioner Schultz called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Greil, Stotko, Strauss, Anderson and Schultz
Commissioners Absent: Harrington
Staff Present: City Planner Matthew Weiland
2. Approve May 8th, 2000 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes.
3. Variance - Setback Variance (219 5th St W)
City Planner Matthew Weiland presented background information on the project.
Commissioner Stotko questioned the existing condition of the garage.
The applicant responded that the roof and siding would be replaced.
Commissioner Anderson asked what kind of siding would be used.
The applicant indicated the siding would be white.
Commissioner Stotko questioned the existing retaining wall would be moved.
The applicant indicated that part of the existing retaining wall would be moved two feet for the addition. He
further indicated that the depth to limestone and topography in the backyard made it difficult to expand the
retaining wall any more.
Commissioner Strauss stated that the property can still be reasonably used with an addition fit into the setbacks.
Commissioner Harrington also feels that this does not meet the requirements of the variance criteria. He feels
granting the variance would be a special privilege for the property owner.
Commissioner Stotko added that such a large addition would not fit in with the neighborhood.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Anderson moved and Commissioner Schultz seconded to recommend to City Council the
approval of a 3' rear yard setback variance based on the findings that the applicant has satisfied the
variance criteria as follows:
That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or
building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the
same district.
The literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicants of rights commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10.
That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions of the applicant.
That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is
denied by Chapter 10 to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. No non-
conforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district, and no
permitted or nonconforming use of lands, or buildings in other districts shall be considered
grounds for the issuance of a variance.
Upon vote taken, Ayes, 5; Nays, 0. Motion carried.
Findings of fact:
Commissioner Anderson state that the variance request met the variance criteria due to the layout of the lot, the
topography of the lot, the limestone on the lot, and the that the reuse of an existing building is a good.
Commissioner Schultz added that the literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicants of rights
commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10, due to the layout of the
lot.
4. Updates and Other Business
Planner Weiland briefed the Planning Commission about the neighborhood open house held for the proposed
Dakota County Family Housing project at Hastings Marketplace.
Adjournment:
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 7:15 pm.
2