My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 08161983
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
1983
>
PL PACKET 08161983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 3:30:40 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 3:30:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
15
SP Folder Name
PL PACKETS 1983
SP Name
PL PACKET 08161983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
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).
View images
View plain text
CITY OF..ST. ANTHONY <br /> REQUEST-FOR-PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION <br /> ---------------- --------------------------------------------i <br /> Date Submitted Type- of ActionRequeste Agen a Item N er <br /> August 12, 1983 Concept Review Pub] i c Hear i ngs-a <br /> Date Action X Formal Action/Motion Title <br /> Requested Informational <br /> Other Elmwood Cond i't i ona 1 <br /> August 16, 1983 Use Permit (02-83) <br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ <br /> TO: St. Anthony Planning Commission <br /> FROM: David M. Childs, City Manager <br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ <br /> SUMMARY DISCUSSION OF SUBJECT: This hearing is -continued from the July 19-i 1983 <br /> meeting to allow the neighboring residents and the church to meet and discuss the <br /> church's plans . This meeting has taken place and it is my understanding that agree- <br /> ment was not reached. The Planning Commission is presented with a more difficult <br /> decision than if a compromise had been achieved . A conditional use .is different from <br /> a variance in that the applicant for a variance must prove special circumstances or <br /> hardship. In a conditional use request, however, the use is generally assumed to be <br /> allowed and the question before the Commission is more closely related to what reason- <br /> able conditions are to be placed on the request to assure protection of health, safety, <br /> etc. , etc. <br /> ALTERNATIVES : <br /> 1 . Recommend approval of the request with conditions as determined by -the Commission . <br /> 2. Recommend denial of the request based on reasons of the Commission. <br /> RECOWIENDATION: The church has not demonstrated to staff that they have sufficient) <br /> explored other alternatives and have not submitter; sketches, and site plans as <br /> requested by the Commission , and therefore have not presented a case as of this date <br /> which would warrant approval . <br /> ATTACHMENTS : SEE LAST MONTH'S PACKET <br /> Plan Application Form <br /> Mailing List Letters of Support/Objection <br /> Notice of Hearing <br /> CITY MANAGER'S REVIEW: COMMENTS : <br /> � U , ci s <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.