Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council ' April 22, 1985 <br />Regular Meeting Page Five <br />--------------------------------------------------------------------- <br />decided it was time to review this area and had <br />discussed hiring an independent planning consultant and <br />she would like to see the Planning Commission use <br />a different planner, to get a new perspective of <br />the issue. <br />The Council discussed tabling the item until they <br />have had further opportunity to review it. Mayor <br />Links asked if a three week delay, to the next <br />agenda session, would hurt the developer. Mr. <br />Kraft replied it would push construction back <br />even later, and he has spent over $10,000 already <br />on the site plans, and has met with the Planning <br />Commission four times and revised the plans each <br />time based on direction from the Planning Commission. <br />Attorney Meyers pointed out the problem is the area <br />is inconsistent with the Comp Plan, and if they <br />deny this request, he feels it would end up in <br />litigation, yet if they approve it, they will hear <br />about it in court on the Johnson case. <br />Councilmember Hankner stated she did not feel the <br />City should tell a business what their hours of <br />operation can be, as she didn't believe the City <br />had done it before with any other business, and <br />she recommended discussing the whole development <br />further. <br />Motion/Second: Hankner/Haake to table the Kunz <br />Oi Company evelopment reveiw and conditional <br />use permit until the next agenda session on May 6, <br />1985. <br />5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried <br />Director Thatcher reviewed the applicants request 12. Appeal of <br />to subdivide the R-2 prcperty, consisting of 16 Planning Comm. <br />dwelling units to R-1, with 14 single family dwell- Resolution <br />ing units, which has been denied by the Planning Regarding M. H. <br />Commission. Anderson <br />Fred Haas, of M. H. Anderson Construction, explained <br />that in 1981 they went before the Planning Commission <br />and City Council with a PUD, and they have not been <br />able to find buyers for the double homes in the past <br />two years, so would like to change and put in single <br />family homes. He stated the vehicle to be used <br />would be decreasing the density from 16 units down <br />to 14, <br />Arlan Grueling, representing M. H. Anderson Construc- <br />tion, explained he had been with the City of Bloomington <br />when M. H. Anderson had gone before them for similar <br />changes in their Bloomington project, and he explained <br />