Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Inver Grove Heights which established the law in this state on that issue a. <br />back in the 70's) .. <br />7. None of the traditional or compelling reasons for granting of a variance <br />such as is proposed here exists in this case. <br />8. No known mechanisms exist or appear proposed for payment to the <br />surrounding property owners for the reduction in their property values from <br />such a subdivision by the City or the developer. <br />9. Additional concern would be that attempts might be made to include <br />defacto, if not legal, common easements between the parcels which <br />should not be allowed. <br />10. The existing lot already has 5-10 passenger and commercial vehicles <br />located thereon and a doubling of this would add to the disruption of and <br />further detract from the surrounding properties. <br /> <br />In short, the increased density mix and all the attendant factors that go therewith, <br />supports a denial of the variance. It would not befit the area as is reflected by the <br />ordinances and requirements extant. I am confident that any disinterested <br />zoning body will so find. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />l-ee W. Cunningham, Esq. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~ <br />