My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1988/04/18
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
Agenda Packets - 1988/04/18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/16/2025 11:43:09 AM
Creation date
6/16/2025 11:25:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
4/18/1988
Description
Regular Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
0 Mounds View City Council U � 6 � k' V L April11, 1984 <br />Regular Meeting g Four <br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br />Attorney Meyers exp'_ained the problem is he has requested <br />a building permit extension, and the City has to take <br />some type of action, and if the building permit is to <br />be removed, they must do something. <br />Councilmember Hankner stated it is difficult to make a <br />intelligent decision at this time, without the owner <br />present for the Council to talk to, as there are a lot <br />of questions to be answered. She stated they are not <br />certain what his plans are for subdividing the lot, and <br />they would be creating a land -locked piece of property, <br />and she is concerned with taking visionary versus <br />reactionary —tion. She also pointed out the City <br />would lose control of the quality of the development of <br />a road and the area if this lot is developed now. <br />Councilmember Blanchard reminded the Council the property <br />does not have to be land -locked, as there are other <br />alternatives to putting a road through. <br />Councilmember Hankner stated she felt if the property <br />owner really ::anted the building permit, he should <br />have been present for the meeting. <br />Councilmember Quick stated he agreed, and there are any <br />number of ways the property could be subdivided and <br />developed, and if the Cizy does not take action .:ow, <br />they are going to lose control of guiding the develop- <br />ment of the area. <br />Councilmember Hankner stated some of the property owners <br />would like to subdivi�e and sell off in the future, and <br />others are opposed, and she would only approve it if <br />'00 percent wanted it. <br />Attorney Meyers stated that since a building permit was <br />issued, i public hearing should be held to determine <br />whether the building permit should be rescinded, and <br />then notify the property owner so that he can appear <br />before the Council and answer their questions. <br />Cierx/Administrator eauiey noted a hearing had been hu!C, <br />to -onsider the acquisition of the property. <br />City Planner Herman clarified that the property owner <br />has requested an extension of the building permit <br />itself, as the building permit was already issued. <br />Attorney Meyers advised that a public hearing would <br />allow the property owner an opportunity to state why <br />he feels the extension should be granted. <br />City Planner Herman stated Staff already sent a letter <br />to the property owner, on December 21, 1987, stating <br />that an extension had been denied, which is what <br />percipitated his attorney contacting the City. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.