My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-21-94 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1994
>
06-21-94 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2025 2:51:18 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:28:09 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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).
View images
View plain text
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 21, 1994 <br />6. PLANNING/LAND USE & ZONING: <br />A. Resolution No. 94-17: Ubl/Anderson Minor Subdivision <br />M/S/C John/Johnston - to adopt Resolution No. 94-17 granting a minor subdivision to <br />Tom and Lisa Anderson based upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission. <br />(Motion carried 5-0). <br />B. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance to height standard for a front yard fence, <br />Applicant: John Conrad, 3812 Jamaca Avenue <br />Mayor John opened the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. in the council chambers. The <br />public hearing notice was published in the June 8, 1994 Stillwater Gazette Extra and <br />adjoining property owners were notified. <br />There was no one to speak for or against the variance request. <br />Mayor John closed the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. <br />M/S/C Conlin/Mottaz - to grant a variance to John Conrad, 3812 Jamaca Avenue N., to <br />allow a six-foot high solid wood fence on the right of way line to replace the screening <br />provided by a lilac hedge that existed prior to the 1993 MSA Project based on the <br />following findings: <br />1. The six-foot high fence is to replace screening which was formerly provided <br />by a much higher lilac hedge. <br />2. The hedge removal and subsequent need for the screening fence was on <br />account of a public road improvement. <br />3. The hardship for the variance was caused by the public project and not the <br />property owner. <br />4. The circumstances in this case are unique and the fence would not alter the <br />character of the area. <br />5. The city will provide the material and applicant will construct the fence. <br />Applicant must obtain a building permit for fence and it must be completed <br />within one year from date of issuance. <br />6. The fence is located in the middle of the block and not on the corner, <br />therefore, will not obstruct the view of oncoming traffic. (Motion carried 5-0). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.