My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-21-2004
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
04-21-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2018 6:39:00 AM
Creation date
8/28/2018 6:38:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Minutes
GOVBOARD
Planning Commission
DOCTYPE
minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
Mounds View Planning Commission April 21, 2004 <br />Regular Meeting Page 4 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Mr. Nordness explained that they were waiting to finalize the plans before meeting with Mr. <br />Veenstra. <br /> <br />Mr. Veenstra asked why he was never asked whether he wanted to sell out. <br /> <br />Darren Sylvander, representing ProCraft Homes, explained that Mr. Veenstra did not have land <br />available behind his house that they could have purchased. He further explained that Mr. <br />Veenstra’s home is too nice to purchase and knock down making it not cost effective to add his <br />property to the project. He also indicated that information was provided about the potential <br />development to Mr. Veenstra when the project began. <br /> <br />Mr. Veenstra indicated he did receive the paper but was never approached to discuss it. He then <br />said he feels this will destroy a beautiful environment and be an absolute disaster. <br /> <br />Gary Mann of 3009 Wooddale Drive asked what the new height of the land would be. <br /> <br />Director Ericson reviewed the plan and indicated the area of substantial elevation change would <br />be along the newly created road but the backyards would remain about the same. <br /> <br />Mr. Mann asked whether the City has considered a “ghost plan” and the potential impact of this <br />development on the surrounding lots and their potential for future development. <br /> <br />A resident commented that he had asked the Mayor to do that and it has not happened. He then <br />said their concern is to make this an integrated plan that does not limit development potential for <br />the residents to the south of this area. <br /> <br />Mr. Mann commented that the wetland to the south of this property has been filled and asked <br />how that would affect the neighbors for future development. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated that the wetland stays a wetland as delineated but, with development, <br />there are ways to work with that and fill it and provide additional wetland in other areas. He then <br />said that the City has been informed of potential issues with the owner of the property to the <br />south and filling of the wetlands. He further commented that there remain options for <br />development of the properties to the south. <br /> <br />Mr. Mann asked what the status is of the development of the Brennan property because he is <br />concerned about finalizing this development and limiting potential development options for the <br />neighbors to the south. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated that there is nothing pending but he has spoken with Mr. Brennan <br />about his plans and been told he is not sure what he wants to do or when. He then said that the <br />City communicated with him information about the fill and the issue with the wetlands in an <br />effort to bring him into this but he was not interested in having a soil analysis done when the <br />borings for this project were done. He further commented that all the City can do is address the
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.