Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Plan <br />Planning Commission April 19, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 5 <br /> <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated he believed the site plans indicate removal of the existing <br />structures, and the accessory building may be a new structure, however, he was not certain. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Kaden/Miller. To Approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 611-00, a <br />Resolution Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Development Review and <br />Wetland Buffer Permit Request for Messiah Lutheran Church, Located at 2848 County Road H2; <br />Planning Cases CU00-001, DE00-001 and WB00-001, as Amended to Indicate that Stipulation 3 <br />be Changed from (24 Feet or Less) to (25 Feet or Less). <br /> <br /> Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. <br /> <br /> <br />6. Planning Case VR00-002 <br /> <br />Property Involved: 8438 Groveland Road. <br />Discussion Regarding a Variance Request to Allow for the Installation of an Eight-foot Tall <br />Fence in the Front Yard of the Property. <br />Applicant: Gregory & Elizabeth Brunes <br /> <br />The applicant was not present. <br /> <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson gave the staff report as follows: <br /> <br />This is a request for a variance to allow for a fence taller than that permitted by the Code, in the <br />front yard of the property located at 8438 Groveland Road. The applicants, Gregory and <br />Elizabeth Brunes, have had some difficulties with a neighbor located to the north of their <br />property, and felt that the fence would provide a privacy screen between the two properties, and <br />reduce, if not eliminate some of the harassment issues and problems they have been <br />experiencing. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated there was significant discussion of this item at the previous <br />meeting of the Planning Commission, at which time, the applicant addressed the Commission, <br />and explained why she felt that a hardship was evident in her case. He indicated the Planning <br />Commission empathized with the applicants’ situation, and would have desired to approve this <br />request had there been any means to do so, however, the Commission explained to the applicant <br />that there was no hardship that could be tied to the property that would warrant the construction <br />of an 8 foot-fence rather than a four-foot fence. He advised that the Commission must abide by <br />the language in the Minnesota Statutes and the City Code when granting a variance. He <br />explained that there are seven criteria, all of which must be addressed and satisfied, however, in <br />this situation, that could not be done. <br />