My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-15-1992
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
04-15-1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2018 10:24:42 AM
Creation date
7/27/2018 10:23:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
4/15/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
UNAPPFIOVED <br /> • <br /> Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1992 <br /> Regular Meeting Page 5 <br /> denied this variance request in 1991 was <br /> because Mr. Cook had accepted the plat <br /> with the attached building restrictions. <br /> Chair Mountin stated that she felt that <br /> the easement was a practical difficulty, <br /> but that there was no undue hardship on <br /> the applicant, because the house design <br /> could be changed to work within setback <br /> requirements. <br /> Commissioner Stevenson asked why the <br /> house couldn't be built at a 58 foot <br /> setback. <br /> Mr. May replied that he wanted to keep <br /> the house in line with most other homes <br /> in Mounds View. <br /> Planner Harrington clarified that the <br /> • house could be built with a 58 foot <br /> front setback. The current design could <br /> not be built without a side yard <br /> variance, however. <br /> General discussion ensued regarding the <br /> possibility of vacating some of the <br /> easement so as to build the house <br /> further to the east, making the side <br /> variance unnecessary. Planner <br /> Harrington indicated that he could <br /> consult with the City Engineer on this, <br /> but that it probably would not be <br /> feasible, as there is a major storm <br /> water detention area nearby. <br /> Commissioner Ruggles asked the applicant <br /> if he would build on the lot if he had <br /> to adhere to a 58 foot setback. <br /> Mr. May stated that while the house <br /> would still fit on the lot, it would not <br /> be an ideal situation. He then asked if <br /> hardship must be proven in order to get <br /> a variance. <br /> • Chair Mountin explained that the <br /> Planning Commission must see evidence of <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.