My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-24-1996
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
07-24-1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/27/2024 9:11:34 PM
Creation date
7/31/2018 11:10:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
7/24/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
140
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
Mounds View Planning Commission <br />Regular Meeting <br />March 18, 1993, and in order for the Planning <br />Commission to consider this request, a <br />variance extension must be granted, then a <br />development review process would begin. <br />Acting Director Pruitt informed the Commission <br />that Short -Elliott -Hendrickson, the City's <br />Engineering Consultant, has reviewed the site <br />plan and found the expansion should have no <br />negative impacts on the drainage system. She <br />also noted that, based on the discussion at the <br />June 19th meeting, parking appears to be <br />adequate for the site. <br />Acting Director Pruitt noted that a revised <br />resolution had been distributed to the Planning <br />Commission. The contingency contained in <br />Resolution No. 458-96 was noted stating that <br />the variance shall become void if the work is <br />not finished within one year of issuance. <br />The Planning Commission inquired whether or <br />not this proposed variance request is similar to <br />the previously approved variance and Acting <br />Director Pruitt replied that she had been in <br />contact with Paul Harrington, former <br />Community Development Director, who stated <br />that this request is very similar to their previous <br />request. She also noted that the addition <br />would be used for storage of items and <br />equipment currently stored outside and that the <br />addition would line up with the existing building. <br />The Planning Commission then questioned <br />whether or not it should be a new variance, not <br />an extension of the previously approved <br />variance since the variance expired in 1993. <br />Motion/Second: Brasaemle/Johnston to <br />approve Resolution No. 458-96 as amended <br />approving the variance request of Herbst and <br />Sons Construction Co., Inc., 2299 County Road <br />H. <br />July 10, 1996 <br />Page 6 <br />• <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.