1980-05-07 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ MOUNDS UIEW PLANNINO COMMISSION RF.GULAR MEETIN4 PAGE 2 May 7, 1980 ~-r sDiscussion; (~' eurmeister-Is there any reason you can't bu~l~on'~he.back of the house4 Jahnson-I need the double garage and it 'js n~possible to bu11d on the existing garage site. Haake-There is nn obvious protrusion 1n ~-proposed structura and 1t doeso't seem to be in the spirit of the code requiring a hardship statement for such a request. Johnson-There are two houses to the north u-fi o`u~'-structure that would match the setback we are proposing, " Mc_C~zrthy Hnw is your neighbor's house on 8634 situated to your lot? Johnson-His garage is on'the south end o~'Ti~s house so we are garage to garage. , Chairperson Mountin noted that it was necessary to determine the interpretation ' of Che code and its tntent ~nd that strict ~ interpretatiom.of the code seemed tc limit ' applying the code fairly to ail ~^esidents. After further disaussion, the fol7owing motions wePe fiade: , Naake made a motion to deny the variance for Mr. Thomas J. Johnson's 1^equest, (8025 Red Oak ~rive) for variance of a front yard setback to his house that would crea:e a protrusion in the structure of his current house. The addi:ional 24' wouid make his front yard setback' only 40~ when the ad~acent structures to hishause for setbacks are 62' and 65'. TM s motion re,~ects his request because it is not in the spirit of Code Section 40.05 Subd. C.~. Burmeister seconded the motion. (3) qyes-Haake, McCarthy, Burmeister (3) Nays•~Skiba, Fedor, Mountln Nays: Skiba: Doesn't see any probiems in the 'disE'ahce between the proposed garege and the ad~acent structw~e. It wculd be approxi- -. mateiy 51' from the neighboring structures. ~/ ~ ~ ,, ~ ' ;.2 ~ ;' . '~ ' 'F , , ' . . :r .,_ ,;:i , ~ . ~ t~ ,,,,,, ,, , ,,; ,, ,„ s , ,.,, . . . . ...,. . . ,. . , ,a~:,.: ~ .._..