The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1978-02-08 PC MinutesPROCEEDINOS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ~ CITY Of MOUNDS VIEW "~iSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA A regular meeEing of the Mounds View Planning Commission was called to urder at 8:~5 PM on February 8, 1978 at the Mounds View City Na11, 2401 Highw~y 1~, Mounds View, Minnesota 56112 Members Prssent: Acting Chairperson Meckeben Ca~imission Member Fedor Comnission Member G7axer Comnlssion Member Burmeister Comnission Member Foss A1so Presento Councilmember Baumgartner Building end Zoning Official Rose Absent: Chairperson Ilaake Coimiission Member Blanchard 7he min~~tes of the January 25, 1978 Plann9ng Cormnission meeting were apprnved as presented. MAJOR SUBDIVISION REQUEST OF EIGENHEER BUILOERS, I~C. Official Rose reported that Mr. F.igenheer had redrawn the plat with a looped road r.fystem wM ch co~nects to Edgewood Drive and County Road I, creating 22 1ots. ( lot 6, 8locks 1 and 2 could be suhdivided further, and in the case of Lot 6, '+~81ock 1, two conforming lots cau7d be created. In the case of Lot 6, 87ock 2, the lot, if subdivided~ wou7d create two substandard frontage lats at 77,8'. Officlal Rnse recommended that thls iot be split with 7ots 5, 7 and 8 to creaCe conform9ng and buildable 1o~s. Lot 5, Block 1 is one foot shor~t of the min7mum corner frontage of 100 feet each direction. Lot 8, 81ock 2 is four feet short of the minimum corne~^ 4'rontage of 100 feet each direction. Lot 7, B1ocY. 2 is f9ve feet short of the minimum interior frontage oi' 85 feet. Offic?al Rose stated that variances would be required for lats 5, 7 and 8, if approved as presented. Official Rase stated that the drainage easements would be adequate, as presented. and that the extension of the road ea,ement into the proposed cui-de-sac of the northern property requires a varia~ce as it is only 50 feet {60' requirsd). StaFF recormends the variance so as to create nearly standard iats. The servlces and roadway can easity be piaced on that width, This wnuld 6e an exceptional case and would not allow development of the property to the noreh. The water system would aiso be required to be loo~ed. Rcting Chairperson Mackeben pointed out that Mr. H genheer was leaving Los o at 755' in hopes that the ordinance would eventually be changed ta allow less than 85' minimum frontages. Conmission Member B~rmeister s*ated that she did not see the herdship involved ith the 5' that were missing on Lot 7 as Mr. Eigenheer would make the lot standard ~f he took 5' from l.ot 6. Sha also stated that sne felt the Pianning Commission shouid ;nake their recarmendations based on present day ordinances, not what might happen in the future. 'rebruary 8, 1978 ~ Of~icia7 Rose also pointed out that Got 10 had been changed from R-2 to R-1 end that the north/south street had been moved further west when the revisions were made in order to make the iot atong the east property 11ne code confolming. Pege i Mr. Eigenheer suggested that the north/south road could be mnde intc a ane-wey road, 50' wide, which wau]d a71ow more roam for the 1ots. Officlel Rose repliad that Q one-way road woutd mast 11ke1y 6acome an enforcement problem and pointed ouC thaC Mounds View ~id not have any one-wr.y streets, end edded that plena shoutd be approved with the ob~ective tnat they be policeabie end maintainable. Comnission Memner Foss steted that he wouid like to see a 50' road and recomnended granting a variance for the two lots which wauid then be 82,5' each. Official Rose replied that regardtess of easements, the roed would still he at least 3~' wide, which wou1J ~ust a11ow the homes to be built closer to the street. lie also stated that the City w&s requesting 60' roads to allow room for a sidewalk in the future. He also pointed out that the City aoutd be responsible for whatever damage mighC be done ~ahiie snow Rlowfng or whatever and tliat with the wider easement, there would be less chance of damaging any propert~. Officiai Rose also recommended :hat if any variances were going to be granted, they should be granted for the iots rathe~ than the strest, Comnission Member Foss pointed out that in the 1lterature from the Metropolitan Councit, they reromnend 40' wide ruads and since *.he street in question was going to be a short one, he felt the City should be flexible and approve a 25' wide blacktop. ~"~ ~ ~Cartmission Member Burmeister pointed out that Lhe main concern is the width of Che ~-~ right-of-way ~o protect the City. Comnission Member Fedor pointed out that there is somewhat of a hardship involved ~ith the 60' water main on the south side of the property. Acting Chairperson Mackeben pointed out that the number of variances reyuested had dropped from 15 to 3, from the orlginal pre7lminary plat, with less lots being requested for rezoning ta R-2 from R-1. He also asked thc Plannirig Comnission n~zmbers to consider the practica7lty of approving the 155' 1at. Comnission Member Fedor staCed that if the 155' lot was approved, the Pianning Comnission would more or less be seying that they wou7d approve the lot sp11t later. Commission Member Burmeister recommended that Mr. Eigenheer get together with Staff again and work on the problem areas which had been mentioned ta try end bring the plan up to code. Official Rose replied that he had worked with Mr. Eigenheer and po#nted out all the areas that needed to be improved and made recommendations on how to improve them, which Mr. Eigenheer chose not ta Fol'low. He stated, hn:~ever, that he would be willing to work again wfCh Mr. ~lgenheer if he was wi111n~ c~ rt~ke the required changes. Mr. Eigenheer replted that he had Tost one 7ot when the first prellminary plat was revisad and incurred an extra cost with the stre:t and did not want to lose any more money cn the development. He aiso stated that he would 11ka a 25' blacktop for the street. ~Acting Chairperson Mackeben tnquired 1f a 25' roadway would 6e acceptabie. Official february 8, 187N Page 3 ~ Rose replied that with two-way traffic, corners, parked cars and so forth, he ~ould not advise it. Mr. Ei~anheer stated that he had eliminated many of the variances he had asked for earlier and that he felt the P7anning Commission had indicated they would approve his development if some of the variances were eliminated. Councilmember Baumgartner replied that there was abso7utety nothing in the minutec of the previous Planning Comnission indicating thet any variances would be guaranteed if the plan was approved. Comnission Member Burmeister added that the on7y variance that had been generally agreed upon by the P7anning Comnisslon had been the R-2 zoning. MSD (Foss-Glazer) to approve the plat as presented. 3 nayes, 2 ayes Acting Chairperson Mackeben stateo that he had voted against the r~iotion because of Lot 6, since it seemed inevitable that it would someday be divided inCo two 77.6' substandard 7ots. Comnissinn Member Burmeister stated that she had voted against the motion for the same reason and that she also felt the other two lots, 7 and 8 could be made into standard lots. Comnission Member Foss stated that he did not feel Lot 6 should be taken into r consideratian since it was standard, Camnission Member Durmeister replied that I~ wM le it was standard, it was most likely going to be subdivided, wM ch would ~ make it substandard. Comnission Member Giazer stated that while he had sECOnded the motion to get it onto the floor for discussion, he had voted against it because he feit the issue of Lot 6 should be reso7ved, and a fudgpment on the desirabillty of a 50' roadway should be deferred to Staff. Ne also stated that he did not see any viabie alter- natives other tha~ upgrading the rest of the 7ots at the expense ot Lot 6. REAFFIP.MATION OF COMMISSION POLICY REGARDING UPGRADING OF ANOKA COUNtY AIRPORT A rept•esentative of the League of Women Voters read their statemenC of support for the Co~nission's policy regarding the upgrading of Anoka County Alrport and asked that the Comnission restate or reaffirm that policy for them. Councilmember BaumgarCner stated that while the Plar~ning Cortmissian did not finve their own pollcy, they had ~ointly writte~ a resolution with Che City Council regarding the upgrading of the airpot~t. Actin^y ~hairpersun Mackeben stated that Resolut9un qA74 had been approved by the City Council and made an official City resolutlon. MSP (Giazer-Mackeben) that the Planning Comnission reaffirm it's support of P.esolution ~874, dated Plovember 28, 1977 in opposition to the expansion of the ~ Anoka County Airport, Janes Fie1d. 5 ayes . ~ehruary 8, 1978 Aeqe 4 ~ REVIEW Of E%ISTING LAN~ USE MAP AND ZONiNO MAP FOR COMPREHENSIVE UPDpTE Official Rose steted that he hoped to be able tn spend some time in the next planning Comrisslon meeting reviewing what appears to be contradictions between the Land Use Map and Zoning Mep, and asked that the Commission Members review the maps before the next meeting and took for what they be'.ieve to be pPObtem areas: UPCOMING AGENDA AND PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL ACTfONS Official Rose reported that the City Counctt, at fts last meeting, tnbled tlie public hearing for the 7-17 conditional use permit for gas pumps. At present, the City Attorney does not advise that the City deny the permit mereiy on the lack af continuity to our Camprehensive Plan, but. tha: we need somethYng more concrete, such as an advise impact. Acttng Chalrpersa~ Mackeben stated that he wauld like to have Che number requ9red for a quorum changed from five tu four. MSP (Mackebert-Foss) to recommend tn the Council that they consider making Pour members of the Planning Cwnmission a quorum rather than five. 4 ayes ^ 1 nay (`~Carmission Member eurmeister stated that she had vated agatnst the motion as a quorum of four could result in a sp11C Vote. MSP (Mackeben-Foss) to,ad~ourn the meeting at 9:0.5 Pt4. 6 ayes Respectfully submitted, - ~ ~ ;, . , -. ~, ~ Pameia Young Recording Secretary