My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2003 Planning Commission Packets
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
2003 Planning Commission Packets
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2012 11:08:57 AM
Creation date
8/29/2018 5:48:59 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
707
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
�v _:--� ;_: - <br />Mounds View Planning Commission <br />Regular Meeting <br />November 19, 2003 <br />Page 9 <br />Conunission is not comfortable with the intensity of the development on the site given the <br />wetlands issues, Staff will draft a resolution recommending denial. <br />Chair Stevenson indicated that the Coirunission is not comfortable with any more than the eight <br />lots. <br />Mr. Harstad aslced what the basis for the eight lots was and why that was the magic number. <br />Chair Stevenson indicated the City does not know that eight would worlc and he doubts <br />personally tliat the ground can support eight houses. <br />Commissioner Hegland indicated that whether or not the property can support houses is an <br />engineering question. He then said that the previous proposal was for 11 lots and the <br />Conunission was not comfortable with that but did agree to the eight lots. He further commented <br />that the Silver Lalce Road lots have more issues than just the wetland. <br />Mr. Harstad indicated that his proposal meets the wetland zoning ordinance requirements as <br />drafted. He then said he understands the eight lots on Longview because that is the number of <br />lot that fit with the frontage requirements but he does not understand why there is an issue with <br />the Silver Lalce Road lots if he meets the Ordinance requirements. He further commented that a <br />townhome development north on Silver Lake Road was not denied because of a driveway <br />hazard. <br />Coinuiissioner Zwirn indicated the developer of the townhomes was dropped down to four from <br />the requested six or eight due to the driveways. <br />Mr. Harstad indicated that if the issue of limiting the numbers is due to water he would like to <br />have an engineer's report that he can submit to the City for their engineer's review and <br />detei7nination of whether or not the City is comfortable. He then aslced for guidance as to what <br />he is doing wrong because his proposal meets the requirements of the ordinance. <br />Chair Stevenson indicated there is an issue of buffer versus wetland and this is not buffer this is <br />wetland. <br />Commissioner Scotch indicated Mr. Harstad is building in a wetland. <br />Mr. Harstad indicated that Rice Creelc has delineated the wetlands on the lot and he is proposing <br />to build in the wetland buffer not the delineated wetland. <br />Cliair Stevenson indicated that he did not feel that the land is a buffer. He then said he has <br />wallced on the land and through the area when the parlc was put there 10 years ago and it is a <br />wetland. He further commented that the Commission is not going to support more than what <br />was supported two years ago. <br />The Commission asked Staff to draft a resolution recommending denial of the request. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.