Laserfiche WebLink
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting <br />page 3 -- --December 19,-1979 <br />----------------------------- ---- <br />Fedor stated the re.n:w; for voting nay on the. 3. DYNAMIC DEVELOPERS (cont.) <br />main motion was because he foresees all kinds of <br />problems created Ily Iovelollmuni. of Ihi:: mdrgival <br />area. Burmeister stated she wants to see what the <br />City foresees for the area as to how it should be <br />developed. Glazer concurred. <br />Glazer moved to recommend to Council they con- <br />sider purchasing this property with the intent of <br />preserving an existing water detention basin. If <br />study proves this detention basin can be modified <br />or reduced in size, I would recommend ,the Council <br />- <br />pass this information back to the Planning Commis- <br />hi <br />sion so as to reconsider this development. It was <br />seconded by Fedor.; <br />4 ayes <br />;; <br />The motion fails. 4 nays <br />(Nay votes: McCarthy, Itaake, <br />Blanchard and Goebel) <br />Goebel gave his reason for voting nay was because <br />he believes these developers have complied with <br />the requirements of the City. <br />Burmeister moved to amend the motion that Planning <br />Commission would like to have the Council direct: <br />staff, or an appropriate body, to do a study of <br />natural drainage area:: that will have to be rc- <br />tained in the City and not be built upon. It was <br />seconded by Freemore. <br />Saye.,^, <br />The amendment failed because 3 nays <br />the main motion failed. <br />(Nay votes; McCarthy, Blanchard, Goebel) <br />Haake advised the developers that their request <br />could go before the City Ccuncil for their approval. <br />Mr. Fretag wanted it on record and communicated to <br />Council that they have followed explicitly what <br />the law requires. <br />Haake moved that Council direct qualified pro- <br />fcosienel experts in whatever they feel necessary <br />to come up with a plan for Mounds View regarding <br />wetlands, flood plains, holding, areas, and green- <br />belt areas. They should bear in mind the need of <br />these areas to be pre^crvcd so as to answer our <br />storm sewer problems also. The Planning Commis- <br />sion can then continue in our directive of <br />drawing up a comprehensive plan for Mounds View, <br />enabling us to logically designate City land use. <br />In the interim, we want these qualified proves- i <br />sional experts to romp up with tentative sites they <br />would consider for possible solution to our, problem. <br />It was seconded by Burmeister. 8 ayes <br />0 nays <br />