My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2000 Planning Commission Packets
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
2000 Planning Commission Packets
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2021 1:10:53 PM
Creation date
3/5/2012 3:44:55 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.
/
1197
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 />Item # 6 <br />City of Mounds View <br />Planning Commission Report <br />Meeting Date: Ap�il 5, 2000 <br />Title: <br />DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 612-00, A RESOLUTION CONTEMPLATING <br />THE APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE FOR A REDUCED CORNER LOT FRONT SETBACK TO ALLOW A <br />GARAGE EXPANSION AT 2741 HODGES LANE. <br />Planning Case No.: VR00-001 <br />Applicant: Cathy Magoris <br />Location: 27� 1 Hodges Lane <br />Applicable Regulations: <br />Section 1104.01, Subd. 3b, regarding Setbacks: Principal buildings shall maintain a thirty <br />foot setback from any lot line abutting a public street. <br />Section 1125.02, Subd. 2 outlines the criteria to be used by the Planning Commission in its <br />review of variances. <br />Background: <br />The applicant, Cathy Magoris, who lives at 2741 Hodges Lane, which is located at the northwest <br />corner of Hodges Lane and Park View Drive, is requesting a variance from the required thirty- <br />foot corner front yard setback. She would like to expand an e�sting attached two car, 576 <br />square-foot garage into a 864 square-foot three car garage. <br />The Planning Commission heard this variance request at their meeting on March 15, 2000, giving <br />significant discussion to the hardship criteria and whether or not all of the criteria were thought to <br />be met. <br />Analysis: <br />As with any variance application, for the Planning Commission to act favorably, there must be a <br />demonstrated hardship or practical di�iculty associated with the property that makes a literal <br />interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive to a property owner. State statutes <br />require that the governing body review a set of specified criteria for each application and make its <br />decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, <br />Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all of the <br />criteria are met. The individual criteria, with responses, are as follows: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.