The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApril 2, 1971 t:JCJ;AlDA 4-.:1- ~I I. 0 rod I'~ a.~I!.l! IV~. ~ A.me.n dmenf .;z. Greor~e So~..Je.,.,.e. 'Re.~u.ec.J -14 'fSu./lJ Gra. ra.jL 3, CJ"a.fW\a...'s. ~;S;-Il. A-dd'N Pre.'''",;,,,,,,,,')' D/4+ ~. :Jo~n "B6"'O~ O'....~~..J.,;,ttJs o,",73l.u'ld;I'IJ Pcrwtd- ;..St~/,~1V /k 5". S-/-l!.nlf,uis+ Ques+,.ns. o",S...b.d;IJ.'j"flJ ;1'\ 5e..~/';'AlIQ A meeting of the Grow Township Zoning and Planning Commission was held April 2, 1971 at Crooked Lake school. Chairman Norm Stout called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM with Commission members Christenson, Holasek, Langseth and Rither present. Chairman Stout presented proposal received from the Grow Township Board of Supervisors which proposal seeks to amend the Grow Township Zoning Regulations Ordinance #8, paragraph 4.04, Lot Provisions. Bradley arrived at 7:35 PM. Town Board Chairman Louis Appleby stated that if we got the notice for the public hearing to the paper right away we could have the hearing on the 19th of April. Continuing, Appleby stated that, "I think that this amend- ment will solve a lot of our problems for us." Holasek asked if the proposed amendment would pertain to all other zoning districts. Chairman stated that the new amendment allows some lots to be buildable where before they were not buildable. George Sonterre appeared before the Commission regarding erection of a steel garage on his property located at 16231 Valley Drive. Sonterre stated that the garage would measure thirty-six feet by forty-two feet; house one tractor truck with a gross weight of 12,000 pounds and one trailer only as it needs repairs. Jones arrived at 7:55 PM. In response to questioning by Holasek, Sonterre stated that a pick-up truck, used for hauling parts, would also be stored in the garage and that he considers the pick-up a commercial vehicle. Sonterre noted that present driveway is located to the west of his house and upon erection of the garage the driveway will be relocated to the north to provide access to Valley Drive; subject garage will then be located in front of the house on the front yard set-back. Sidelot set-back on the east lot line will be 20 to 24 feet; garage will be some 50 or 60 feet from the front bfthe house. Bradley inquired about the respective heights of the two buildings. Sonterre stated that the height of the west end of the house is about twenty feet above grade and that the height of the garage would be about eighteen or nineteen feet above grade. Christenson asked, "If both the garage and the house were on level ground would the garage be higher than the house?" Sonterre replied, "No." Bradley asked if Sonterre had checked with neighbors and was there any objections voiced. Sonterre stated that he had heard no objections. Holasek read from Zoning Regulations Ordinance #8 and noted that proposed use was a commercial use in a residential -2- April 2, 1971 district because the garage would house more than one commercial vehicle. Bradley asked about visibility on Valley Drive and proposed driveway location. Sonterre stated that visibility was O.K.. Holasek stated that the Ordinance paragraphs 4.05 (F) and (r) would govern and if subject paragraphs do not prevent proposed use then he did not see anything objectionable about the use and could foresee no problems in issuing a Special Use Permit. Sonterre voiced dissatisfaction with the cost of the Special Use Permit. Bradley asked, "~fuat percentage is $100.00 of total cost of the building?" Sonterre did not reply. Chairman Stout agreed to confer with Township attorney to interpret Ordinance paragraph 4.05 (F) and (I) to see if Special Use Permit is needed. Bradley asked Sonterre when construction was to begin. Sonterre replied that the start date would be June 1, 1971 or sooner. Chairman Stout obtained copy of plat of area in which garage is proposed to be erected. Discussion ended with no action taken. Bob Chapman appeared before the Commission and presented preliminary plat legally described as Chapman's Fifth Addition, Section 32, T32 R24, Anoka County Minnesota. Chapman stated that the preliminary plat had been approved by the Town Board and the County. Christenson stated that Commission must see record of approval. Chapman stated that he would provide the record of approval. Discussion was held regarding location of subject plat, whether it was located in the R-1 or R-3 Zoning District. It was noted by Holasek that it appeared to be located in the R-l Zoning District. Discussion was held regarding Ordinance paragraph 4.04 Lot Provisions, (E) and the subsequent time limiting factor. It was moved by Holasek and seconded by Bradley to recommend to the Town Board of Supervisors the acceptance of preliminary plat legally described as Chapman's Fifth Addition, Section 32, T32 R24, Anoka County Minnesota subject to meeting provisions of the Grow Township Zoning Regulations Ordinance, paragraph 4.04 (E). Motion carried. Chapman submitted copy of subject plat to Chairman Stout and Rither endorsed plat with Commission resolution. John Boros, Route 2, Anoka, Minnesota appeared before the Commission. Boros presented a drawing of sub-division of lots located on east line of County Road #9, Section 16, T32 R24, Anoka County ~linnesota. Boros stated that he wanted to know if he can get a building permit in subject area; that the lots measure two- hundred feet by two-hundred feet. Discussion was held regarding whether subject area is located in the R-l or R-3 Zoning District. -3- April 2, 1971 Winner stated that ~t appeared that subject area was not entirely within the R-3 area as shown on the Zoning Map; that subject Boros area extended approximately six-hundred feet south of NVlt, Section 16 line, to coincide with approximately 164th Avenue NVl as shown on the Boros sub-division drawing. Holasek stated that in the absence of a legal description, it should be good enough. Boros stated that he was concerned about obtaining a building permit for a lot in the area." Holasek stated that it would be up to the Town Board to determine whether Boros lot is in the R-l or R-3 Zoning District,and if it is not within the R-3 District the owner must apply for a variance. Boros noted that lot in question measures two-hundred feet by two-hundred feet, approximately one acre. Chairman Stout agreed to take Boros drawing of sub-division to Township attorney to determine south boundry of the R-3 Zoning District as shown on the original Zoning Map. Stout noted that if subject area is not included in the R-3 District, owners will have to apply for a variance. Stout agreed to contact attorney on April 5, 1971 and notify the Building Inspector of findings. Arthur Stenquist and Larry Stenquist appeared before the Co~~ission. Stenquist stated that they owned property located in Section 18, in the vicinity of Oneida Street mv and 159th Avenue ~N. Stenquist stated that they have been selling land in this area and that most if not all of the lots are one acre or larger. Stenquist asked if they could continue sub-dividing lots of one acre or did the new ordinance mean that they had to do something else. Stout noted on the Zoning Map that the area surrounding the Stenquist area as presently developed was in the R-l Zoning District. Stout noted that according to the Ordinance any further sub-division must conform to the R-I requirements but that if Stenquist wanted to continue with one acre development he could come in and request a re-zoning to the R-2 Zoning District for the remainder of his property. No action taken There being no further business to come before the Commission it was moved by Jones and seconded by Holasek to adjourn. Motion carried. Meeting was adjourned at 10:15 PM. Robert A. Rither, Clerk, Zoning and Planning Commission o 0 GROW TOWNSHIP PLANNING AND ZONING BOAHD PROCEEDINGS () 1. SUBJECT OF PETITION: () Rezoning () Special Use Permit () Building Permit cxT .t'lreliminarv d'" A P at or prop(!rty IVlSlon () Variance () Other 2. NA,\lE OF PETITIOl"ER: Bob Chapman J'DDRESS: Chapman's Fifth Addition Section 32 T32 R24 Anoka County 3. LOCATION: Minnesota 4. DATE OF PLA..1\'NING Mll ZONING BOARD ~'EETING AT WmCH HEARING WAS lIELD:April 2. 1971 s. PLANNING.AND ZONING BOARD ACfION: A fl1otion was made by Ilolasek and seconded by Bradley to recommend to the Town Board of Supervisors the acceptance of preliminary plat legally described as Chapman's Fifth Addition. Section 32 R32 R24. Anoka County r~nnesota subject to meeting provisimns of the Grow Tot~ship ~o~~g:Regulations Ordinance paragraph 4,04 (E). .r"', \..) 6. HE'ffiERS VOTING: Christenson JOnes Bradlev Langseth Holasek Rither Stout 7. VarES: Seven\YES. Zero NAYES. Zero ABSTAINED. 8. COHlEl\TfS ABOUT PET IT ION : 9. SIGI\'ED: Norm Stout Planning and Zonin~ Board Chairman: ,--', 10 Date: