Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission November 7, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 8 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson reminded the Commission that Mr. Harstad had testified to the <br />Commission that the property was not as wet as it is now prior to the development across the <br />street. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 4 Nays – 1 (Johnson) Motion carried. <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />6. Planning Case MI01-002 <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson explained that the applicant had requested approval of a minor subdivision at <br />7841 Spring Lake Road to split off the rear 260 feet of his lot that would front on an unimproved <br />portion of Knollwood Drive. He then commented that City Code requires that all lots front on a <br />publicly improved street. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that less than 10 feet of the lot fronts on the right of way for <br />Oakwood Road and said that the Code does not interpret how much frontage needs to be on an <br />improved street. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that, with the exception of the access issue, all other requirements for <br />the subdivision have been met. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that, based on discussions at the last meeting, it was determined that, <br />if the applicant were to dedicate a portion of the lot to the City for a future cul-de-sac, it may be <br />possible to allow access onto unimproved Knollwood Drive for a short term solution. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that Staff is recommending that if the lot to the south should <br />subdivide, Mr. Diehl would be required to participate in the costs to improve the cul-de-sac. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zwirn asked if the cul-de-sac stipulations would be attached to the property to <br />ensure that a new owner would be required to comply with the cul-de-sac requirements. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that the cul-de-sac requirement will be attached to the property’s title <br />and recorded with Ramsey County. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zwirn asked if the property owner to the south would be required to honor the <br />cul-de-sac agreement should they decide to subdivide. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that the property owner to the south would be required to participate <br />in the costs to develop the cul-de-sac in order to subdivide the lot. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zwirn asked if the property owner to the south had agreed to the cul-de-sac <br />requirements. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that the property owner to the south had not been consulted <br />concerning the cul-de-sac issue.