Laserfiche WebLink
F . _ :.�- . I I . <br />< :- .YJ'. � '�I ���:.; •«t �_ .. �� � �. �. . � :__ r�:fl l . -. .. -_ '�`_ -._ . <br />I_'_"'�- "'� _�.. � r�: r.�.,, _ �._"'-_ . ., . ' "' _' �' ' <br />Mounds View Planning Commission <br />Regular Meeting <br />January 5, 2000 <br />Page 11 <br />it was an uncertainty at this point, however, through his examination of <br />this to be a more realistic possibility. <br />Chairperson Peterson stated the delineation presented app� <br />surveys and aerial photographs, and that a boundary line <br />very similar to that represented. He commented that this <br />boundary, rather than an actual delineation. <br />� �::. <br />� ; , <br />� tn �e fairly �.��aj' <br />il�d be determ�.ned <br />�ared to,;�i��>�a pho� <br />found <br />a7:�s�c� �apon <br />;�a �Tz�� �1,r.1 bP <br />Planning Associate Ericson explained that in the early 19�0'�, ��r���;�� �h� wetland zoning maps <br />were created, they were based upon national wetland data, �i��h� �x7��� �Y��� �levations. He advised <br />that the boundary line indicated on the map presents �� �rc�v����,���, :�r���r;��, <,.ccording to the <br />National Wetland Institute, is the location of the el�vaiio�r ��hat ���r�s.��,r�� 9�s the wetland, <br />however, it is not intended to be an accurate reflection t��'�v���;xc �he wetl'asf�� ������lly exists. <br />Commissioner Stevenson inquired what new ,ii�'�rinatior� �ur��.�l� %c� �vailable to the Commission if <br />this item is tabled until the next meeting �`�l���nning Assa�i�a�� ��:�'t����a �#.ated this would likely be <br />the result of any discussions held by MrFs£�Vlistelske�;�zid the �cx��a�recA� �i�operty owners, as well as <br />,.. <br />the manner in which Mr. Mistelske wc�uld like to prt��eed, in h��it of the discussion. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Ste <br />Reduced Side-yard Setb <br />Comnni�st��`. . <br />A <br />Chairperso� <br />therefore, tl� <br />matter, ,��t�€�s. <br />r� . ;, tn to reven� <br />hl,?� g P <br />�rties remaining in <br />nes, one developm <br />all of the property,� <br />> �., <br />. To T��Y� �onside�'ation of the Variance Request for a <br />Lapor.� ��i�%� �(.Inti! the Next Meeting of the Planning <br />Nays — 0 Motion carried. <br />the .���p1ic;��ii submitted this request on December 15, 1999; <br />ss�c��� �c��i�d have two additional meetings in which to review this <br />f1�t� of�the application. He advised that the Commission was not <br />�����4;�nt from developing his property. He explained that the <br />/ c��-� oftentimes oddly shaped, or subject to certain limitations, and <br />the potential to impact another, therefore, the City desires to insure <br />are provided equal opportunity. <br />aonFr Jol�xastin added that the City would also like to see that all developable land is <br />�, ��z�,g�s��re, the Planning Commission is charged with the responsibility of making <br />� G; ,���� cr�i ial development is not hindered in the future. Chairperson Peterson advised <br />tl:za.u�� atc�empt to find a solution that is acceptable to all parties. <br />5. Considerat'ron of Resolution 602-00, a resolution establishing the year 2000 meeting <br />dates for the Mounds View Planning Commission. <br />