Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission November 7, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 4 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated that he felt that would be an appropriate requirement and indicated <br />that he thought the developer would be amenable to that since there are costs involved with <br />removing trees and clearing a site. <br /> <br />Chairperson Stevenson commented that he did not have an issue with the property owner <br />wanting to develop the land but said Chapter 1010 was written to protect the wetland from added <br />water pressures that come with building houses too close together in it. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated that the larger lot size requirement also limits the amount of <br />impervious surface in the area. <br /> <br />Chairperson Stevenson indicated he was not sure where the exception is that would allow the <br />Planning Commission to grant the variance. He then commented that this seems to be a prime <br />example of why the City wanted lots of 125 feet and to reduce the lot width by 40% of the <br />requirements does not seem appropriate. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller asked, if the builder were limited to eight (8) lots, would the proposed <br />development match the other lots on the other side better. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated that the way the plat is drawn currently the lots match up well with <br />the development across the street. He then indicated that most of the lots are 100 feet wide <br />which is 33% larger than the minimum lot width requirement of 75 feet and noted if this were <br />not a wetland the developer would be able to have 14 lots. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson asked if this property had been previously platted for 14 lots. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated that no formal plats were approved for this property previously. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson indicated that since Rice Creek Watershed District has approved the <br />proposed development he would support approval. He further indicated that with the drainage <br />swale and requirement to do soil borings before trees are removed there should not be a problem <br />with the request. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller indicated that the Planning Commission is not denying the builder his right <br />to build but rather to require him to meet the 125-foot lot width requirements. She further <br />indicated that requiring the builder to meet the 125-foot minimum lot width requirements would <br />still allow for eight (8) lots. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zwirn indicated he felt that 11 lots is over saturation for the land and he would be <br />more comfortable with the eight (8) lots. He then indicated that he felt approval of this <br />development with the 11 lots would be providing a long-term detrimental impact to the <br />neighborhood. He further commented that with residents fertilizing lawns and runoff into the <br />wetland there is the potential that it would create a stagnant pond and jeopardize the wetland <br />area. <br />