Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission September 5, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />3. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda <br /> <br />There were no resident comments on items not on the agenda. <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />4. Planning Case No. VR01-009 <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson addressed the Commission and explained the circumstances surrounding the <br />request for the variance. He noted that Staff feels it is important to maintain the 10-foot sideyard <br />setback from the existing house due to the location of the house on the lot. Planner Atkinson <br />also explained that Mr. Zinser has joined Mr. Gustafson in developing the property and noted he <br />was in attendance to answer any questions the Commission may have. <br /> <br />Chairperson Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. <br /> <br />Mr. Zinser told the Commission the only change to previously submitted plans was the request <br />for the variance for the 94-foot frontage on County Road I. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller questioned where the garage on Lot 3 would be located. <br /> <br />Mr. Zinser indicated he had planned to locate the garage towards the street and it would face <br />Long Lake Road adjacent to County Road I. He then stated he would comply with any request <br />of the Commission concerning the location of the garage. <br /> <br />Chairperson Stevenson noted he felt the Resolution should refer to Lot 3 for clarification and <br />reference the drawing for the location of the house on Lot 4. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller inquired as to the purpose of the 100-foot frontage requirement. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that on corner lots it is better to have the larger frontage due to the <br />two front yards and the 30-foot setback requirement. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller questioned how the Commission could grant a variance when the property <br />has not been officially subdivided. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that the variance would allow the subdivision to proceed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller indicated she was still concerned about granting a variance. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Ericson suggested adding a stipulation to the Resolution <br />requiring that the variance be subject to the application and approval of a major subdivision for <br />the property. <br /> <br />Chairperson Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:20 p.m.