Laserfiche WebLink
April 11,11979 2 7 3 <br />Mr. McLean explained that this City will prepare what we feel is an adequate <br />Comprehensive Plan to submit to Metro Council. Metro will review and point <br />out the areas that do not conform with their overall pain. The City then tries <br />to negotia+e their position, <br />The next problem is density, We need to develop some numbers to go along with <br />these various definition of density. Mr. Gourley said he found his notes <br />from two years ago that says trite Board then was thinking of reducing house <br />square footage. He brought this up at this time to let the Board know that <br />reducing footage is not a new idea. <br />Regarding supporting ordinances; three areas to be looked at: <br />1. Street lighting - Mr, Gourley suggested.contacttng NSP'and Anoka Electric <br />and ask them to supply materials and cost information. <br />2. House numbers - The plan should include someicriteraln platting so that <br />there will be uniformity to house numbers. Mr. Mobley noted that there <br />is a mailing going out'of the office soon that asks each house and busi- <br />ness to post their street numbers. Mr. Gourley asked the Clerk for the <br />police files regarding wrong house numbers. Mr. Johnson asked how these <br />house numbers are presently assigned. Mr. Mobley explained. Mr. John- <br />son noted a recent plat that had a street name already used in this City. <br />Mr. McLean said it was caught and changed. <br />3. Another area of -controversy is the area of natural gas. Mr. Gourley <br />wondered if there was a way to determine who will service the natural <br />gas in the initial platting stages. Mr. McLean noted that Mr. Locher <br />had some suggestions in this area. Mr.Gotwald said he did not feel the <br />Clerk should identify the utility that serves a particular area. 1'1 <br />4. Another area to be looked at is the sign ordinance. Mr. Gourley said <br />he felt the ordineoce is alright but needs to be enforced. 'It still i <br />has not been approved by the State of Minnesota. Mr. Mobley noted one <br />problem is getting sign owners to maintain their signs. <br />Mr. Gourley asked the Board members if they have suggestions regarding revising <br />the Comprehensive Plan. <br />Mr. Heath noted density as a real problem. There was further dicussion on <br />this matter. Mr. Gourley noted you do not get difinite figures from the <br />Metro Council. Mr. Shearen said there is a problem with zoning. 'We have <br />not set a.pattern. Maybe we are at a point where we should zone part of the City. <br />Mr. McLean noted that Metro was critical of our soils map in that the City <br />broke it into only two categories, marginal and severe. We should review <br />this, Metro wanted some set controls on some soil that the City did not re- <br />quire control. <br />Mr. Gotwald said that since our last presentation to Metro the State has <br />prepared WPC - 40 for private on site septic systems. <br />Mr. Johnson asked who is responsible for drain tile? Mr. Mobley said the pro- <br />lem is the State Building Codes does not demand gutters on houees and usually <br />in a plat the owner is responsible for gutters as well as furnishing his lot. <br />Mr. Reinert asked if once this Board gets into this plan and start changing <br />a few things is going of have a domino effect and throw the present plan out <br />of kilter? We may be back to ground zero and do the entire thing from scracth <br />Mr. Shearen felt that this is\just an update and maybe more definitive. <br />