Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission June 19, 2002 <br />Regular Meeting Page 11 <br /> <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />Acting Chair Miller indicated that both Commissioners had personal obligations that needed to <br />be taken care of <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland indicated he was ready to make a motion and explained that the action <br />taken by the Commission was a recommendation to Council that could be overruled and urged <br />residents to attend the Council meeting to make their feelings known. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Zwirn. To Approve Resolution 699, a Resolution <br />Recommending Denial of a Requested Rezoning of Lots 1-52 and Lots 59-72, Block 1, Red Oak <br />Estates No. 3, From R-1, Single-Family Residential, To R-3, Medium Density Residential. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland indicated he had made the motion to deny because the request is only <br />partially in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and there are enough questions as to <br />whether or not it would have detrimental effects on the area that he feels strongly about denying <br />it. <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch agreed that there are too many issues that would need to be addressed <br />before she would feel comfortable approving the request. She then said the grading needs to be <br />cleaned up. She further indicated that she is not against approval of a nice development but the <br />existing development was not done properly. <br /> <br />Mr. Harstad said he has heard a lot and agrees with some of it but looks at the development for a <br />chance to get beyond the hurdles and correct some of the issues that were caused with the earlier <br />development. He then said that 17 years ago there was a request for a rezoning that was denied <br />and he and his brothers and sisters are trying to clean up some outstanding issues as their father <br />retired. He further indicated that he could not answer to why the grading was not done in 1973 <br />but said the process is different today and the City is better able to require that things be done <br />according to the plans. <br /> <br />Mr. Harstad said he could not speak for other builders or for Harstad Todd because that was his <br />father and his uncle but he did assure the Commission and residents that any development that he <br />is in charge of would be completed properly. He further said he was willing to work things out <br />with the neighbors if his property is causing them trouble as well as working with the <br />homeowners association to work out those issues but before he can do that a working plan for <br />use of the property needs to be determined. <br /> <br />Mr. Harstad commented that he has kind of a bad rap here tonight and he understands some of <br />that but said he was not a party to what happened in 1973 and that is not the way he does <br />business. He then said that whether this is approved or denied when the time comes someday he <br />will work with neighbors, staff and work with the governing authority to try to alleviate these <br />problems. <br /> <br />Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried.