Laserfiche WebLink
• Mounds View Planning Commission March 5, 1997 <br /> Regular Meeting Page 3 <br /> Motion/Second: Johnston/Brasaemle to adopt Resolution No. 495-97 recommending <br /> approval of a conditional use permit to allow an oversized garage for Tammy Bellamy, <br /> 2185 Pinewood Drive, Mounds View Planning Case No. 473-97. <br /> Commissioner Johnston added that he thought this is a good use of the oversized <br /> garage and that he'd rather see the equipment stored inside rather than outside. <br /> Motion Carried: 6 ayes, 1 nay (Commissioner Obert voted against the motion because he <br /> felt there were some concerns regarding the case that have not been addressed and that <br /> the matter needs further discussion). <br /> Chair Peterson informed the applicant that the City Council will hold a public <br /> hearing and take the final action regarding this request at their March 24, 1997 <br /> meeting. <br /> 6. <br /> Planning Case No. 474-97 <br /> • 8344 Groveland Road <br /> Applicant: Carol Hoopingamer <br /> Request for a minor subdivision (one lot into two). <br /> The applicant, Carol Hoopingamer, was present. <br /> Planning Associate Ericson explained that the applicant is requesting a minor <br /> subdivision, splitting a property that is a through-lot on Groveland Road and <br /> Knollwood Drive into two lots. He added that as the Commission had suggested at <br /> applicant felt that the way the easements were presented at the last meeting was <br /> acceptable. Mr. Ericson read aloud the conditions contained in Resolution No. <br /> 494-97. He added that Staff is recommending approval of this request. <br /> The Planning Commission raised the issue, as they did at their agenda meeting, <br /> whether the requested easements were excessive. Mr. Ericson explained that <br /> Staff is requesting the land between the NSP easement and the proposed rear <br /> property line be set aside for a drainage and utility easement and the result is a <br /> wider than normal easement area of approximately 35 feet along the rear property <br /> line for Parcel A. It was decided that since the applicant had indicated that the <br /> proposed easement was acceptable, no changes would be made. <br />