Laserfiche WebLink
4. <br />5. <br />6. <br />7. <br />8. <br />9. <br />10. <br />015722077766^/95 <br />I <br />. - 1 -- «-rT«ir mav be denied in some circumstmces on ihe <br />A contoonal«« p„hensive pto. Haibffi! <br />basis that it is 323 N.W.2d 757 (Minn. 1982); <br />BDUtKOTint. Ma^wrod. 467 N.W.2d 631 (Minn. App.Klffi^SSSS^Ialm ». NWI. m <br />(Minn. 1978). <br />lygiaai Sr^sTSSSiSSad-. <br />504 N.W.2d 66 (Minn. App. 1993). <br />Neighborhood denial.^ ChanhaSSSa <br />g Br£S»aiS7MT;7;r m.. um. »■ ™ <br />865 (Minn. 1979). <br />Knn-d.Toert ooinions regarding the effect of a proposed use on the value <br />revieTtte'niSd! TSTis espi^Tme if the appUcant has submitted <br />expert testimony to the contrary. <br />special <br />not relevant. Wgstiing OlY 9) la? N W 2d 571 <br />(Mhm. 1969): » v»'»“ "f St. BBL 1« <br />(Minn. 1966). <br />A mere list of Ihe sources of information to support a (tenial is not <br />558 (Minn. 1972). <br />Aesthetic considetalions which adversely affect value of <br />320 (Minn. 1981). <br />Page 101