My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1980/03/27
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Parks, Recreation & Forestry Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1980
>
Agenda Packets - 1980/03/27
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/31/2025 12:44:11 PM
Creation date
3/31/2025 12:41:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
Parks, Recreation & Forestry Commission
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
3/27/1980
Description
Regular Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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
MOUNDS Y!C4 PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting <br />Page_S------------------------------------------------------------------ March_Iss_1280 <br />Glazer abstained because he felt there was not 6. PRELIMINARY CONCEPiāt <br />enough information about the pond. He would REVIEWAL P.U.Q. <br />like to have DNR and RCWD reports. He ieit (continued) <br />strongly about losing the natural drainage setting <br />unless it was proved to be necessary. <br />Rose reported that the applicant, John Miller, requested 7. MILLER INDUSTRIAL <br />the 'tanning Commissions input with regard to his PLAT - Sketch plan <br />sketch plan. The general location of his parcel -is reviewal - Major <br />north of New Trunk Highway 10 and south of County Road J. Subdivision (2 lots <br />The existing zoning is a combination of R-1, 8-2 and into 14) - Rezoning <br />1-1. The Comprehensive Plan had denoted the area (R-1 to 0-3 b 1-4, <br />Light Industrial. lie further noted that the Judicial 1-1 to 8-3) <br />Ditch 11 flowed through the property and that the <br />RCWD's initial review Indicated development could <br />occur above the 899.D elevation. Rose added that, <br />the RCWD was, however, reviewing that elevation for <br />potential change. The access proposed was a simple loop <br />in and out. MnDOT is presently reviewing this with their <br />plans for new Trunk Highway 10. The soils, as noted in <br />earlier reports, indicated limitations. <br />Miller, applicant for subdivision and rezonirl, intro- <br />duced himself and just asked that the Planning Commission <br />offer any direction they could which would help him plan <br />for the development of his plat. He required or requested <br />no motion. <br />Haake asked what specifically Miller has planned for <br />uses. <br />Miller stated he had nothing definite but that he would <br />stay within the limits of the zonings requested. <br />Fedor wanted to see further review by the DNR and RCWD. <br />Burmeister wanted to hear MnDOT's comments with regard <br />to how this fits into the relocation process. <br />Miller stated that he would modify to meet their <br />recommendations. <br />Glazer also wanted to see further review by ONR and <br />RCWD. <br />McCarthy discussed the soils and their limitations. <br />Gary Comstock, engineer for Miller, requested that the <br />Planning Commission offer direction to Miller with <br />regard to the sketch plan. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.