My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
gr00090_000049_pg072
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
MNHistoricalSocietyFiles (CC Minutes page-by-page 1958-1981)
>
gr00090_000049
>
gr00090_000049_pg072
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2011 6:59:30 PM
Creation date
4/12/2011 10:59:12 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
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
March 12, 1979 Page 7 <br />policy and suggested that the Council might want to reconsider the <br />earlier petition for a light on Knollwood. Mayor McCarty asked that <br />Staff check into it and report back to the Council. <br />Acting Administrator Anderson reported that MnDOT will be at the April <br />2 meeting, at 7:30 PM to discuss the new Highway 10 alignment. <br />Acting Administrator Anderson reported that the Police Department had <br />made several significant arrests over the weekend. <br />MAYOR MCCARTY'S REPORT <br />Mayor McCarty reported that he had attended the Governor's conference on <br />natural disasters the previous Friday and recommended that Mounds View's <br />emergency plan be updated and asked Staff to handle it. Councilmember <br />Rowley recommended that it would be a good item for the Safety Commission <br />to handle. <br />Mayor McCarty reported that he had received a call from Dick Kaiser of <br />the Jaycee's, offering their help for Clean -Up Day. <br />Mayor McCarty asked for comments from the Council concerning lot splits <br />before meeting with the Planning Couu,iission. <br />Councilmember Hodges stated that he felt the issue had been discussed <br />several times and that he felt they should remain at 85' unless a hard- <br />ship was shown. <br />Attorney Meyers explained that since 1960 the ordinance has been for 85' <br />frontages. He stated that there were several 165' lots which the Council <br />passed an ordinance on to allow them to be split, creating 82.5' lots. <br />The ordinance was revised and required that hardship be shown for the <br />granting of variances, and the Council amended the ordinance to allow <br />75' lots in minor subdivisions only. He explained that somewhere along <br />the line in rewriting the ordinance, the 165' lot splits were left out. <br />Councilmember Forslund stated she felt the lot frontages should be kept <br />at 85'. <br />Councilmember Rowley stated that she also agreed with 85', but that if <br />a lot is located between two developed lots, they should be able to <br />divide it. <br />Mayor McCarty stated that now the 165' splits are no longer applicable, <br />since it was left out. <br />Councilmember Rowley stated that she would like clarification from the <br />Planning Commission on why they voted as they did, and that she would <br />also like the problem studied further. <br />Councilmember Ziebarth asked that Official Rose check into it before the <br />meeting with the Planning Commission, such as density, land use and so <br />forth. <br />Mayor McCarty stated that he felt the general consensus of the Council <br />was to stay with 85' lots. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.