Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Case VR2016-04 <br />October 5, 2016 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />1. Resolution 1055-16, approving the Variance is attached if the Commission chooses <br />this action. A 5/7’s vote is required (2/3’s of the full Commission 1). <br /> <br />2. The Planning Commission may choose to deny the Variance. An alternative <br />Resolution 1055-16 is attached, supporting denial. A majority vote is required, <br />assuming a quorum is present (quorum = 4/7’s of full Commission). <br /> <br />3. The Planning Commission may choose to table the request, stating its reason. The <br />City has administratively extended its review of the application from 60-Days to 120- <br />Days (Nov 25, 2016), consistent with MN Statute §15.99, Subd 3(f). <br /> <br /> <br />MN Statute §15.99, Subd 2(b): <br />“When a vote on a resolution or properly made motion to approve a request fails for <br />any reason, the failure shall constitute a denial of the request provided that those <br />voting against the motion state on the record the reasons why they oppose the <br />request. A denial of a request because of a failure to approve a resolution or motion <br />does not preclude an immediate submission of a same or similar request.” <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br /> <br />________________________ <br />Jon Sevald, AICP <br />Planner <br /> <br />Attachments <br />1. Zoning Map <br />2. Aerial Photo of Neighborhood with front yard building setbacks (approximate to <br />roofline) <br />3. Site Photos <br />4. Email from Lon Stigney, 7841 Eastwood Rd <br />5. Resolution 1055-16 (APPROVAL) <br />6. Resolution 1055-16 (DENIAL) <br />7. Applicant’s Narrative (with Certificate of Survey) <br /> <br />1 City Code, Section 1125.02, Subd 4(f)