Laserfiche WebLink
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br />FROM: CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR <br />DATE: AUGUST 13, 1985 <br />SUBJECT: JAMES BOYLES, 2840 OAKWOOD DRIVE - VARIANCE <br />APPEAL <br />On June 27, 1985 Mr. James Boyles, 2840 Oakwood Drive, filed <br />a building permit application for the construction of a 16' <br />x 20' deck and an 8' x 6' storage building. Mr. Boyles <br />proposed to construct the storage building 6" off of his <br />property line, copy of drawing attached, and was advised at <br />that time that a variance would be necessary in order to <br />construct the building at this location as City Code Chapter <br />40.10, Subdivision C (2)b requires that accessory buildings <br />be at least 5' from a property line. <br />On that same date Mr. Boyles applied for a variance to <br />construct the accessory building, copy of variance <br />application and supplementary drawings attached. On <br />August 7, 1985 the Mounds View Planning Commission denied <br />the variance request by adopting Resolution No. 140-85, copy <br />attached, which essentially states that Mr. Boyles' <br />situation does not comply with the hardship requirements <br />provided for in the City Code or those considered to be <br />acceptable by State Law. <br />On August 12, 1985 Mr. Boyles submitted the attached note to <br />me requesting that he be placed on the City Council Agenda <br />for consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission's <br />denial of the variance. To outline the case as I am aware <br />of it in order for you to have all facts before you at the <br />time you consider Mr. Boyles' request, I would like to <br />provide you with the following information. <br />1. As previously stated Mr. Boyles applied for a <br />building permit to construct both a deck and <br />the storage building in question at the same <br />time and was advised by Staff at that time that <br />a variance was needed to construct the storage <br />building and per past history on such cases it <br />was unlikely that a variance would be issued. <br />2. Although, being advised of the fact that it was <br />unlikely that the storage building could be built <br />where he wished to place it, Mr. Boyles proceeded <br />to construct his deck per his plan rather than <br />waiting to determine whether or not the variance <br />would be granted or modify his plans as necessary so <br />as to comply with City Code. Had Mr. Boyles modified <br />