Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission October 5, 1988 <br /> Regular Meeting Page Three <br /> 411Chairman Mountin further stated that since the issue <br /> is before the Planning Commission now, it was a good <br /> time to deal with it . <br /> City Planner Herman stated that conditions can be <br /> added that fit along with the request , but she did <br /> not feel the gas tanks fit into that category. She <br /> stated that Staff will follow up on the gas tank <br /> question. <br /> Chairman Mountin stated she would prefer not to take <br /> any action on this until they have a clear picture <br /> of the tanks . She stated it may not be germain <br /> to the request but she is concerned that it is a safety <br /> problem. She also noted there is nothing in the Code <br /> requiring businesses to keep their fences in good <br /> repair , and something should be added. <br /> City Planner Herman replied it would be added to the <br /> nuisance ordinance. <br /> Motion/Second: Zollner/Miller to table action on <br /> this request until the October 18 agenda session. <br /> 4116 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried <br /> Chairman Mountin clarified that the information the <br /> Planning Commission would like to have before them <br /> at the next meeting would include what tanks are in <br /> use , what action has been taken for those not in use , <br /> any further controls over businesses maintaining <br /> their own gas storage and dispensing facilities , if <br /> a conditional use permit is required for personal <br /> storage and dispensing, or just for the sale of gas , <br /> and how far most cities go in grandfathering in a <br /> use that has a significant hazard. <br /> City Planner Herman advised the Planning Commission 6. Staff Report <br /> would be seeing the preliminary proposal for the <br /> Miller property, at their agenda session following <br /> the adjournment of the regular meeting. She explained <br /> the project has been briefly discussed by City Staff, <br /> members of the Council and the developer, who would <br /> like to get a grading permit by the first of next month. <br /> This would require the Planning Commission to take <br /> action at their next session so the Council may receive <br /> their recommendation before their October 24 meeting <br /> which would fit into the developer ' s schedule. She <br /> explained that the Commission would be reviewing the <br /> •grading plan and not the full development. There will <br /> be a wetland alteration permit which involves, generally, <br /> the buffer area. <br />