Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mounds View Planning Commission January 5, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 9 <br /> <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson advised that certain grants could be requested, and different funding <br />sources could be examined, however, it was not likely that the City would consider utilizing Tax <br />Increment funds for the construction of a street. <br /> <br />Mrs. DeGross stated they were required to build approximately 30 feet of roadway along <br />Woodlawn Drive, at a cost in excess of $5,000, when they constructed their home, and they were <br />aware of the costs involved. She indicated that sewer and other amenities were already in place <br />along Faber Street. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson pointed out that the reason the few remaining lots in Mounds View are not <br />developed is because there are quite a few development limitations, as well as wetland issues. <br />He stated many lots were developed, which should not have been. He explained that even if <br />there is not an actual wetland boundary, or standing water in this area, there may be soil <br />conditions that are not sufficiently stable for a roadway or a home foundation, and development <br />may require some excavation in order to establish a road. <br /> <br />Mr. DeGross stated his father has owned this property for more than 50 years, and that is the <br />reason it has never been developed. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson inquired if Mr. DeGross had previously indicated there have been many <br />unsuccessful attempts to develop the property in the last 25 years. Mr. DeGross explained that <br />he was referring to Lots 2 and 3, which are at a much lower elevation than his property. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson advised that when there is development, expenses are involved, and <br />generally, the developer absorbs these costs. Mr. DeGross commented that this was the reason <br />he did not understand the logic in regard to the proposed driveway. He added that if this is going <br />to be done, it should be done correctly. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson advised that the proposed driveway has already been approved by <br />the City Council, therefore, the issue is not debatable at this point. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson inquired if the land in the vicinity of the City controlled lot was fairly clear <br />of vegetation, as indicated on the aerial photograph. <br /> <br />Mr. DeGross explained that there were currently grasses and some large trees in this area. He <br />stated this land was higher in elevation, and sloped downward. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson reiterated that he did not believe the Commission could take action upon <br />this request at this time, and suggested the matter be tabled until their next meeting. He <br />reiterated that the best solution would appear to be for all interested parties to discuss the matter, <br />and attempt to determine some solution <br />