My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
gr00090_000054_pg294
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
MNHistoricalSocietyFiles (CC Minutes page-by-page 1958-1981)
>
gr00090_000054
>
gr00090_000054_pg294
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2011 8:06:42 PM
Creation date
4/12/2011 11:27:12 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
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
MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL October 27, 1980 <br />Regular Meeting Page Three <br />MOTION: Rowley made a motion, seconded by <br />Ziebarth, to approve the October 14, 1980, <br />regular meeting minutes as submitted. <br />Ayes -5 <br />Nays -0 <br />MOTION CARRIES. <br />MOTION: Rowley made a motion, seconded by <br />Forslund, to approve the October 20, 1980, <br />Revenue Sharing Budget Hearing minutes as <br />submitted. <br />Ayes -5 <br />Nays -0 <br />MOTION CARRIES. <br />James Odle, 8070 Red Oak Drive: <br />Mr. Odle asked Council if he could record his <br />presentation and Council's reaction to his <br />comments. Mayor McCarty noted that Council <br />had no objection to this. <br />Mr. Odle reviewed Attorney Meyers' letter <br />to the Planning Commission (dated 10- 14 -80) <br />citing several codes that specified requirement <br />of a 5' setback. Mr. Odle noted that he felt <br />a large part of the letter did not relate to <br />his specific request. Attorney Meyers noted <br />that this letter was written in response to <br />a request from the Planning Commission asking <br />him to determine if a 5' setback was required <br />according to current codes. <br />Mr. Odle then noted to the Attorney that he <br />felt the Attorney's original comment about the <br />enforceability of the requirement had been that <br />it would not stand up in the court of law. <br />Attorney Meyers clarified this for Mr. Odle <br />by indicating he had not referred to the enforce- <br />ability of the requirement, but to the enforceability <br />of a criminal conviction if this requirement was <br />not complied with, <br />Mr. Odle then noted that the Planning Commission <br />had not granted his variance, and he was appealing <br />this to the Council. <br />Mayor McCarty noted four variances granted by <br />the Planning Commission in 1977 had two instances <br />very similar to Mr. Odle's request. <br />5. APPROVAL OF 10 -14 -80 <br />REGULAR MEETING MINUTES <br />6. APPROVAL OF 10 -20 -80 <br />REVENUE SHARING BUDGET <br />HEARING MINUTES <br />7. RESIDENT REQUESTS AND <br />COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR <br />James Odle <br />8070 Red Oak Drive <br />Variance Request <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.