My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-21-1991
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
03-21-1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2018 6:15:22 AM
Creation date
7/27/2018 6:15:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
3/21/1991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
xv <br /> Mounds View Planning Commiss o y El) <br /> March 6, 1991 <br /> Regular Meetingig <br /> �p 6 Page Two <br /> • <br /> Attorney Karney stated that past Council action <br /> indicated that the 58 foot setback that is required <br /> is valid, and according to Chapter 40. 05(a)of the <br /> Code, this request cannot be granted. He also <br /> indicated that his interpretation of "block" is, <br /> houses that are adjacent, not on a different street. <br /> Attorney Karney reiterated that the meaning of <br /> "block" needs to be defined; possibly adjacent <br /> developed lots within the same street, from <br /> intersection to intersection, and having the same <br /> front yard orientation. <br /> Mr. Cook presented a layout of the Red Oak Park <br /> subdivision to Attorney Barney. Mr. Cook then quoted <br /> Chapter 40 .05 (C) (a) of the Zoning Code as saying, <br /> "where adjacent structures within the same block have <br /> front yard setbacks different from those required, <br /> the front yard setback shall be within the range of <br /> the setbacks of the adjacent structure. If there is <br /> only one adjacent structure, the front yard setback <br /> shall be within the range of the required setback of • <br /> 30 feet and the setback of the adjacent structure.- <br /> In no case shall the front yard be less than thirty <br /> feet" . <br /> The Planning Commission further discussed the <br /> interpretation of this section of the Code. The <br /> setbacks of the adjacent lots on Sherwood Road and <br /> Red Oak Court were also discussed. <br /> Attorney Karney again pointed out that past Council <br /> action is valid, but questioned if the hardship was <br /> self-created. <br /> Commissioner Peterson stated that he did not see a <br /> problem with the 30 foot setback, however, the <br /> Planning Commission had to do what was legal and <br /> right. <br /> Mr. Cook asked the Planning Commission if a variance <br /> was the only means that could be used to obtain a <br /> reduced setback. <br /> Chair Mountin replied that at this time a variance <br /> would be the only vehicle, however, he has the right <br /> to appeal to the City Council in the event he is not <br /> satisfied with the Planning Commission's decision. <br /> The Planning Commission then indicated to Mr. Cook 411 <br /> that after the appeal, he could request a Code <br /> Appeal. The procedures for a Code Appeal were then <br /> discussed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.