My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-01-1998
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
04-01-1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2018 6:31:26 AM
Creation date
8/1/2018 6:31:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
4/1/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
120
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 March 18, 1998 <br /> Regular Meeting Page 3 <br /> Chair Peterson returned the floor to the Commission for questions and comments. <br /> Commissioner Miller asked what the encroachment had been of the home ; previously <br /> occupied the lot. • <br /> Inspector Dorgan told the Commission the previous a o, e ha.;® , feet from the <br /> property line. ` <br /> Commissioner Brasaemle thanked Preferred Buz -rs for 0 time and - ME put <br /> in to researching, at his request, other home pl• ite. <br /> •Commissioner Obert suggested building an ove g :arage,to comply with the <br /> building foot print requirements, as opposed toWuunnde '°::'y<V ; - car garage. <br /> Mr.Westerlund answered by saying an averssem* o car garac be very close in <br /> size to an undersized three car garage <br /> s yws .h <br /> Commissioner Brasaemle state• • 44'wi.=4 ouse' I'$ car garage still has a <br /> problem because the house i i`-'1 as to b '0'from side property line,the garage only <br /> has to be 5'from the side p 8, , line "o the pro$€ is not the garage,the problem is <br /> the width of the house. T, ouse 12,,J o gara�� all would still require a four foot <br /> van• ce. <br /> • <br /> 'oxnmxsstoner �=enst . ~ted he "inclined to vote in favor of the variance because <br /> the x the lot' 4 ...�.ized when they bought it. It was also known that a <br /> varian" Q' o"_ $e requires• • - the property workable within the EDA requirement <br /> that a 1 9014 uar . •of hom y ilt on the property. <br /> .. `.�.s <br /> • • � •n•' • w'aae (� :• . • • • - • - - w • • • Com• 1061 ► • -•: l • • • *1ga <br /> Four: :�'0t Variance to the e • red 30-foot Front Yard Setback. <br /> :CdlS <br /> Commission Ort stated his agreement with Commissioners Brasaemle and Stevenson, <br /> except for one s'•int; that point being this particular development does not fall under the• • ity's Ho ff' Replacement Projects. <br /> 'eterson suggested as part of the Whereas statements, on Page 2, language should <br /> be added to the second Whereas that says, "No new corner lots would be platted with this <br /> substandard size." The only situations that would not apply would be already existing <br /> properties that are substandard and the home on the property was going to be totally <br /> • replaced. <br /> The Commissioners agreed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.