My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1999 Planning Commission Packets
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
1999 Planning Commission Packets
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2012 3:33:14 PM
Creation date
2/29/2012 1:35:33 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
988
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
i <br />. .; ::. . i. �:' �. _ . . . .. . � �. S, <br />1 . <: . '. `. ....": ::.. .. ,' :�. ..: . ..' 1; I <br />l�ou�ds �1e°�' �fannin� Corr�gnissios� <br />Ite�ealar I�iee���� <br />��y 199 1999 <br />page 5 <br />nt of the propertY, and a garage is located on the opposite side of the <br />not be constructed o� �h �.�°�it placement there. <br />structure which would p ��� <br />_..�o h,�,-v,i;�� to a neighbot <br />Murlowski stated that in 199b a variance had been granted for the <br />1�lr. iicant's propert�� <br />tocated directly across the street from the app ���.� <br />Commiss�at�er Br�t�en stated � ie�� ,�tiself orthe onstruc <br />placement of the original deck <br />ob}ectio�► to approving the request for a variance. <br />Cornmissioner Miller asked if the proposed deck would <br />� orch in continuum <br />applicant had planned °n siding the p s <br />Commissioner Hegland asked if the subject pra�c��Y,' <br />Director Jopke stated that some af t�e hon t�� n tt�� da��� <br />family homes, and the requirements to mee � <br />alt the properties w�� zoned � <br />He stated that ong�n�y� �-'" <br />g� ��e <br />some of the properties in order to acco odate��� <br />Commissioner Hegland stated tY <br />which was previously granted pert <br />Code regardu�g setbacks far i�??- <br />singie fami�}7 �t���es and tv����� l�air <br />.., , r_....it> hnm <br />as opU�� <br />in either <br />Murtowski staLed that the <br />tihe structure. <br />rr�rnunity Development <br />�lthough they are singie <br />iy� R1 zoned properties. <br />was a re-subdivision of <br />xesti �: � Was zoned Rl, and that the variance <br />� e^ �. He asked if there were changes in the <br />��-ification regarding the difference between <br />�t a twin-home is defined as two dwetling units <br />side, front, and rear setbacks remain the same <br />_ __ _ .. <br />;��� �lze was substandard. Er�� Lake Woo�s development had <br />�G��ent perta�ning to the S�lver ercent increase in <br />e requirements, and had provided for a 5 P <br />; to find any documentation supparting reduced setbacks. <br />;~�.�.;:<�> <br />�� ranted a variance for a three-season porch on a <br />; a property owr�e� was g <br />£the development in the early 1990's. <br />,s�� yacd on the eas ����� o <br />� �� .' 000 sq <br />uare feet normaliy required, and <br />���� <br />��°`' �� ' r stated that the 1ot s►ze is less than the 1, <br />��?������°� ��� � det�rmine if it couid be considered an `exceptional circumstance' <br />as��.�,,u�t�������een reviewed to <br />as set forth gn the first criteria. <br />ealt only looking at the width of the lot weC � an app� able ha ds1uP� <br />Ericson stafied that they were r y <br />but he had exam►ned the �a��r °f lot size and be1ieved it could be consi <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.