HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-11-26 PC Minutes. MINUTE5 OF R'HE MOUNU3 VIEW
~ PLANNIN4 COMMI33ION
November 2G, 1975
Tne Mounde View PlanninR Commiesion was called
H~11 by ite ahalrpereon Berbara Haake at 7i35
November 2G, 19T5. The followSng members were
RoberG N'~?or, Don Maakeben, Miohae.l Lonergan,
Uerald ~u6s ~~d Barbara Haake. Rnbert Roaoman
were absent.
to order at the City
~m, on Wednesday,
preaentt Paul Fedor,
Phy111s Blanchard,
nna Nancy 0urmeister
The following correctiono were ma~a in the November 12 minutee:
Page 1, Add paragra~h, 5th senteno9, the figurea "85 x 2G4" nhould
be changed to reed '235 x 264", Page z, paragraph 1 5th sentenae,
the aord "speoiaiK ehould be rhsnged to "epatial'. ~he laeb eentenae
in that paragraph should read °8 syea", rather than "9 ayed."
Pago 2 6th pgrngraph, should be eorreoted to read "6" ayas, rather
L•han "3" syea. Page 3, 5th paragraph, should be ohaaged from 9 ayee
to "8" eyee. Fallowing thia the ineertion ahould tb mgdei Robert
}{qnson, 8408 qrovelan3 Rd., minor eubdtviaioh, A eubdivieion
far e lot eplit of equel widths at t~at addreatl. it waa moved 6y
Npnay durmeleter snd eeaonded by Roberb Roeaman that we reaommend
to the COUnoil that theY approve the ~ot split oT 211.G x 80 for aahert
Heneon~ Thie moElon carried, (8 ayee). In L•tie 7Ch paragreph, it
ahould ba ctfanged from "9" sY~+e ho ~'8" a~ee. The eame is true tor
~ bhe rinal paraqraph, ehanging trie "9" aYes to "8" ayea. On paga
4~ 2nd pa~regraph, it ahould Co carreoked to ^H" ayee fram the incorreat
~~,~,,,% "9" t3yetl. AfCer paragraph 4, the Pollc+wing ehould bp adderd: A motion
vrne mnde by H4.rb8rB Haeke end eeaonded by Nanoy Barmoie6sz~ ta take
from Lhe t$ble PaLrick Pelligx~ino'a reqqaet for eM overair.md eaceaeory
building. Th3n motlah narried. (8 ~yes3~ In pmragraph 6 bhe inoorrect
"8„ ayee ahould ~e chpnged to °6" aye4, Furthar, in paragraph 10
the inoorreot "9" ayea ahould be ahange8 ta 108" aYea.
Aabert Oleser madn the moCion tio approve Che minutep as correated,
thi~ wss eeaonded by Phyllie Biarschard ttnd csrried. (7 t-yee).
ITEM9 FUR CON3YOERAh'IONt
Mr. Geviii L. Bianartnmtte, Propqrty invblvticl - 8312 Red Oak
Dr1.ve. Minor subdl,viaian G2 lote). Mr, Bieaonnette'A rOquent !e to
areate ~i;n L-oAepad .7.nt tbet would Dm N73 feeb l~ng on the aouth lot
11ne by 182 feet wi.de on Red oak, 239 feet on :he n~irth lot 22no,
end 91 1'eet on Fatrchi2d, The »~w ldt qi7.1 be 41 flat xtde faairAg
Fairdhi:i~~ (Weet) and 234 feet on the North 1i.ne.
PhyT?.ia Blanchard moved thnt we recommend ta thb Counoll thtt
tis~/ approve~i,r.e minor eubdivielon nf David L. Biseonnette, areating
a new N.Y. lut nr 91 reot on the Weet and 23~ feeC on Cho Nor~h. Thie
motion wAe ewoonded by Oerald Foee and oar.ripd. (1 ayea),
~
Mounds View Planning Commisaiun Pa6e 2
~°~i Mr. Arthur J, Spagenaki (represente~ by Ron SmiLh) - pronertv
' invalved - 8231 EasCwood Rd, Pta~or eubdivialan (3 lota). The requeat
was to oreRte two additiorx~lots: LoL 1 being 95 x 169 feet; J.~ot 2
~_ being B5 x I29.5 feet; Lot 3 being 85 x 147.5 feet, with a frnnt yard
; aet bank varianoe or z5 feet on Lct 2, and L•he same 25 feet aet bdak on
' Lot 3 facing Arden Avenue ~nd a 30 foot eot baok facinq areenwood
~. Drive, whinh is in aanformity with the or~indnae. The Commiaelon
~ Wae polled:
Qerald Fosa: z wauld like to aee him get the earianoe eo that he
could put up a nicer home. The home next to him io only ? feet from
bho road and theae lnte are. wide, 9ee no problem in glvin~ him the
5 feet.
Phy:lio 6lanchard: Will go alnng with it. Cen see no rsason why the
etreet would he widened end ha needs privaay in hin baak vard.
Robert ~laxer: Woul~ qo along, but would rather see a 2i~ foot set
back.
Paul F'edor: Qo a.long with it. Don~t see any other way of doing it.
Con Mackeben: qo oh~ection. I do think the 2~~ feet baol< would be
a better way to go.
Michael Lonergan: In favor of minimizing the amoun~ of bhe variance
to 27.
Barbara Haake: Qo along ~ith the 27 f"oot varianoe, too.
~erald Fose moved that we reaommend Lo the Councl2 the< thev
j"'~'~, grant Arthur J. 5pagenaki. hie requeat far L•ha 25 foot eAtback on
,a~,! Arden Avenue as he requestad and approve the ma~or eubdivieion at
8231 Eaatwood Rd as pre~ented tonighv in the survey dated November 26,
1975• Thie motlon xas seconded by Paul Fedor and oarried. (4 s~ee,
3 nayee). Me. Haake asked the diesenting aide if they would asre to
mske a aomment. Rotert ~lazer: oenerally support the motion to approve,
buti prefer ta see Che 274 oet udak on Lote 2•& 3, rather than z5•
3chulter & Arogger. Property involved: a~proximately 8;12 &
831E Pleasant Viaw Driva. Th~ aouth 3 feet of Lot 7 and all 0'2•
Lot 8 oS AuditoY`s Subdivieio'd No 89, Remsey Cpunt•y, Minneeota, lySng
weate^ly of the centei~ 11ne of Yleaemnt View Arive ae'now laid out and
travelled.
Oerald Fose axcueed hinself at 8:15 pm.
To ~xplain the request, there are now twa lota facing new
proposed Pleaeant View Drive. The North lot haa the rough dlmenaions
af W 153 feet by N~. 25~.44 feet. The SouCh lot that ie exiatir~g
is 17.0 feet on the West and 211.55 on the North. The request• 13 th&t
theae two lo~s Ue ~oined end re-aubdivide.d intn• three lots. The
dimensions o~ the three lote will be 91 feet wide, with deptha of
spproximately 180 plue feet. The Inepeation Department feele that
thea~ lota may be lower than the roadbed and apecisi considaratlon
should be given to that ae 28" a'~eve the roadbed is needad for a
~itildable lot. The staff feele it ie low. There is a five foot
~ e~sement that Sa to be taken on the Weab and East line for utilitg
.V, easemente.
Mound~ Viow Planning Commission ~$~~ 3
~ Robert ~lezer moved Cliat we raaommend to the Councii bhat they
approva ~ha requeat of 9ohultsr ~ Drogger invol,vin~ properbies
looated at approximately 8312 & A316 Pieasant Vlew Dri.ve, with the
lagal description as previously etated. This motion is to approve
the areatton of three lota: Lot 1(Narth iat) mesauring 253 feet
on the South, 91 faet on the West, 28q on tha North; Lot 2(center
lot) meaeuring 233 feet on tha sauth, 91 feet un tho West, 253 feat
on t;P~e tJorth; and Lot 3(oQwth lot) maasur~ng ?11 feet on the 8ottth,
91 on the Weat and 233 on the North. These lots are aub~not to a
3Q foot road right of way ease~ment un the East lot 11ne, plue an
additlonal 5 foot utillty eaeament on the Gaat aiiA Weet gides of theae
lotd. This motion wae seoonded by llon t4ackebett and carried. (6 ayes)
ftobert Olazer then moved tio reaonsider hie previoue motion to
ror,~aziy inolude the abal~donment of the prevloua lot apiit relating
to Traot A. Thirt motion wue seconded by iN~. Haaice end car,ried. (6 ayos)
Ms. Hask~t atated that the main motion ?s again bofora the Commisaion.
Robert fJlamer moved to amenl the main question relatl.ng to the
subdivision and t~ inulude in that motian the faQt thaC there wSll be
the aqandonmenb oi' Traat A of the 3ehulter & HrogRer s~.~bdi•riaion. The
reat oP the motion atands ae previously stated. Thia motion wae
aNaon~ied by Don Maakeben attd aarried. (6 ayee).
Ms, Haake asked: All in favor of the msin motion with the
~.~a~ amendment, ao signify. (6 ayes).
'+~"" Oesald Fose returned to the Commiasion at 8:58 pm.
Ttie Metropolitan Council staPf r~enmmendation regardin~ Mounde
View Compreheneive Plan UpdrsLe wa~ then dSsauased.
Me. Haake inquired as to whether Midwest Planning wauld put
1n the i~ew tables. Counailman 3helqutat raplied tihst their oontrsat
wae oomplered r~hen they printed the 100,aopies and he aseumod the
staff Would du !t. Counailman 3helquiet a],so mantioned that the
Canncil is go1.n~ to considcr thie Monday evoni.ng at their agenda
oese3on. They would like the Commiseion~s suggeeted ~hanges by then,
Garald'Fooe swggestad that acroea from the civia canter, it
could be a po~:a;ible area fnr some ^uture aubeidized houein~ for the
elderly. 'They should be put Sn areao that hsve been xoned as modium
and high density. Mr. Shelquiet atatad th.at this does f~ot need to be--
there nre alternatives to this.
4erald Fosa further stated t;iat on p4Ae 3, 2A, ++e do agree wlth
.he Metropolitan Counc'1 Re!~iew Sta:f that our S olasa functional
olaesifination system regardinp, transportation be Qeleted, anr] use
the new propoe~d transportation p~licy plan.
k,,~„j
~ Mounds View Planning Commieslon
Pa~r,e 4
~ AoUert Olazer eCatrd that• the Planning Commf.seion feels that
entablishing an intei~~han~e for *ha upcraflin6 of Red Oak Drive woul~
not be in thg best intereat of tha reeidenba of thie aonununit;;.
Therefore, ha would iike ta again suggeat thaC the ~lans tn establiah
an interahange on Red Oak Dr1ve be eliminated, Don Maakebsn etated
that Che reasons for thie are: 1. 8ingle =amily dwelling PQ01.dAT7Y.0
of the driveWays oing onto Red Oak Drive nreate safaty hazarda.
2. Red Oak 3ahoo~ie very ulose and it would he detrimental tn the
welfare o£ tha ehildren. The eohool Ys approximately 20 feet from
the at,raet, 3• Dividee the oommunity one more time.
(NOTE TO STFVE: Measure Red Oak Schoul~s west entry from the Pym
to tlte street right of way and ta the pavement).
Robert Olszer stuted that the Commission had met with the Ramaey County
Highway Aepartment. The engineer from 8lainn came in after the meetinR
was ad,~ourned anQ prosented plana that we~e whol].y unacceptiable.
Sinae the Metropolitan Council 3taf'f Reviaw has realize~i that
the SnEerchange would be eatabliahetl oubeide of Mounds View bor•dere in
the City of Blaine it is ^espeotfully requested that the two conaider
a request to intercede on thia matter irt ttie behalf of' the Ci~y,
of Mounde View. It te noted in t,he Metropolitan Council Staff~Revi~w
of our comprehensive plan that bhey sbate that the NortHorn extengion
^~ of Red Oak Drive to aerve arteri~l to the interchange, Re3 ~ak Drive
~ "la not designed to function in this manner.'~
~
Herb~ra Haake stated that in the 2nd paragraph, pagA 4, there ie
no dl.ffarance in the type of ring road syatem so the Commisaion ehould
nob ht~ve ho aonsider their 2nd paragraph: She further stated that
the Commisaion feelo thab our Compreheneive Plari ahould inoor~pora'ce twn
documenta developed by the MTC aaliod~~~De~si~ ~n ~an_d Maintensnce.of Flus-
1'telsted Road Im rovements.and Model Code, o- ~ r Traneit mpac na ys s.
~gar ng eragrap , page 4,~Tte.'~aaTce ata~~ tha~ e ommisaion
wauld like to amend the transpartetiori policy section, (3oel "C'~, to
mnclude aoordinating all city planning with nalghboring municipalities
aleo. Regarding page 4(H1, a aorrection should be made on bhe Mouuds
View map reg¢rding m3nnr arterials and collector streets. County Road I
sho~ald be deaignated only as a co].Sector East of U3 10 acco:ding to the
offiaia7. mc+Cropolitan map.
Don Meckeber. atated L"nat the Commieaiun requests the technical
information from the MeCropolitan Council to enable us ta consid~r
incarporation of Air Support, Air 8pace.and Noise Criteria in our
comprPhenaiva plan and zoning ordinnnao.
Qerald Foas mentioned that on pags 5:~A) j,~ is oup lon~+-range
gaal tn atudy the necda f~r providing housing for our elderly in the
future. Ms. Naake stated that the MaCropolitan P,cview 3tef~ noted that
from the 1970 ceneua that• Mounds View hae a high proportion of iCs
~~
Mounde View Planning Commisalan
Page 5
~ hnunes af0ordable by low and moderate inuome pereone ~s defined !,n
the roderal Statute 8, HousinR Hegulationa. Th1s statemer~t ahouid be
- oalled to ~h^ M~trapolitis:. Council'o sttention whan M~un~e View
requeeto any Pederal or 3tate grants.
Phylilq Blanohard left aC 10:3U pm~
Mr, nean of tha Metropo2ltfln Counail stated to the ataPf thet,
un3er Seotion 7, Waste Managemant, after tha sentenae: '~The C1ty hao
an approvad Comprehanaive Sewer Plan"-••sbrike the Poilowing p~ragvpph
and subetitube thist
Tha preaent capaoity in Mebropolitan interaeptor sewers
sasigned to Mounda Yievi ie a6aut 1.5 millior gsllonp per
dny, or suffioient to serve a population of approximately
16,000, pb eaturation devalopmenL, Mo~ands View will
exoeed th19 populatlan figure by 5,000 peopxe. There
is suPfiolenC capacity in Metropolit¢n interceptors within
and near Mcunda View to acpammadaCe thie extra ~rowth, but
in order to have addl~ional capacity allooated Co it,
the City muet amand .tte Comprahanaiva 3ewer Plr~n and enter
into dieauselona with thA Metropolitetin Waete Control
Commisaion. Tho Comprehenaive PSSn eaknnw].edgea that the
City~a Compreheneive Sewer Plah will have to be amended to
accommadat~ Che propoeed City center developmant.
Marlo}r Johnson - 78A1 911ver Lake Road. Suhdivi.sion request
aoncerning the extenaion of Knollwood Drive North oP Oekwood.
Ms. Haake atated ttzat the Commiealon is going Co have Co taka 25 or
30 feeC for an eaeement and Michaei Lonergan inquired es to whether
this was a dedloatied piece of road. aerald Fose etated that we ehouYd
g+_ve hen c~r lot subdivlaion for then the att,y ¢sn eeeaee the ~r?PA**y•
(NOTE: sTEVE: Xnollwood Drtve that bordera the Esst lot line r~f
Dhe Jahnson propptby!bie that dedinabed?)
Me. Heake statad thn~ Marlow Tohneon Wattte her anawer 6y the
next Planning Commiseian meeting on,Deaember 17, 1975.
The m~~ting wae ad~ourned at 11c00 pm.
~ ~ Respc~u4fully submitted,
„
r ~
r ~ ~
~ ~I V'
~ 8~:~~~~,___
~ oording 3ecretary
~
.,~ ,
~ r