Laserfiche WebLink
_ . ___ <br />_ � <br />- - - ---- - -- -- -- --� -- -- - ...-. .` _.___._ _ _ _ _ <br />_� <br />Mounds View Planning Commission <br />Special Meeting <br />Development. <br />February 18, 1998 <br />Page 4 <br />Mr. Morrish said there would be problems, this being one of the major ones for this <br />Coalition Group. It is the challenge to the group to solve the problem so that all <br />participants can get some benefit from the development. <br />Cflmmissioner Obert stated the Coalition would 'oe a good opportunity for the <br />communities to apply some needed pressure on the Met Council as a way to get the ball <br />rolling on some projects. <br />Warren Johnson, 7710 Grreenwood, asked who chose Mounds View as a pilot area for <br />the Coalition program. <br />19�Yr. I4'lorrish told Johnson the Mayor and city administrators were already working <br />together, and the Mayors Association had been formative in getting the City of Mounds <br />View involved in the process. <br />5. <br />Plannirng Case Pdo. 513-9� <br />8265 Spring Lake Road <br />Applicant: Preferred Builders, Inc. <br />Consideration of Resolution No. 532-98, Approving a 7-Foot Variance to the Required 30-Foot <br />Front-Yard Setback. <br />The applicant, Darryl Westerlund was present. <br />Steve Dorgan, Mounds View Housing Inspector, gave the Commission a brief <br />background on the proposed development: <br />In 1996 the Mounds View EDA acquired a lot at the above address through the Housing <br />Replacement Program. At that time a 20-foot variance was applied for and granted to <br />deal with the property's SO-foot width and the City's 100-foot-frontage requirement. <br />On January 30, 1998, the EDA sold the property to Preferred Builders. As part of the <br />purchase agreement Preferred Builders was required to build a minimum three bedroom, <br />two bathroom home with an attached two car garage. The home proposed by Preferred <br />Builders meets all of the City's requirements with the exception that the house is 7%et <br />wider than the code allows. This width difference is due to the house having a three car <br />attached garage instead of a two car attached garage. The owner is asking for a 7-foot <br />variance to resolve the problem. <br />Staff is recommending approval of Planning Commission Resolution No. 532-98 denying a <br />