HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-03-04 PC MinutesSi:.b
~ Regular MaeEing
March 4, 1981
Mounde View CSty Hell
2403, Hwy 10, Mounde V:ew MN 55112
"'~""".'-----.-"-'-""---"-'----'--'-'_°-----..._.._.._~o..,_..__-'-'
The Mounde View Planning Commieeion wae called
to order aC 7s35 PM on March 4, 1981 by Cheir-
paraon Mou¢tin.
Mambare Preeenti Commieeionere Loeding, McCarChy 1. 2011 Call
Olazer (arrSVed at 7:40), Nountin, Warren, Miller
aod Breska
Alao Preeeuti Couacilmembar Forelund, Building &
2oning 6ffialal Koea .
Corractiunr: 2. Approval of 2-4-B1
Load~n¢s 1) Pg. 1, correc[Son 03 ohould read: Reguler Heeting
"Page 2 of Sxhi6St C, Aaeolution 403-81, Miautee
8.,3., eacoad senteaca inserC "which" in place
of "and" batwaeu the worde "followiag" and "are".
2) Pg 2~ lest paragraph, 4th line, change
"praeided" to'keaidmd". '
~q 3) YS 3~ third puragiaph, 4th line, cfienga
~",. y) "parimekere" !o "parameGere".
'~IID'
G) Pg 6~ firat paregraph, should reed: ',~ ~.
"1. The plat inc7.udee portione of tha
axieting weCla¢ds, but uuch inclusiou
mig6t not be allowable under tha city'~
ordinance.
~
2. IE a vatlnods ordiuance !e passed, rha ,
lagsl bounderf.ae establiebad by tha
otdl,nance are likely to differ fr~m ~ ~ ~'
thoee shovn on the preeent plat.
3. ~Phe praeent propoeal doas aot demm¢eCraCe ~
Chae,l•be exintiag watland cannot be pre- ~ ,
earved under the pYesont FxopoaaS nor ~
dooa it demonrCrata that rha axisGing ~
M6~C14Cd can ba presarvid •ft~r dar~lopm~nt." '~ -~
S) Pg 6, l~~t parsgraph, oorr~ct "utrophlc'~ to
"euCropbic".
6) Pg 6, HeCarthy'e comment~ sacond 11qe -- ~
CbGRgB "raiee" to "iook at".
~
. . ,,,
,. ~_ , ,. ,
PROOSBDINOS OP THS PLANNINO COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUND9 VIBW
RAM9SX COUNTY, MTNN650TA
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNINO COMMI6SION Regulat Meetiqg
Pa$e~2'_.'-" '-._-'--- .~....4" "--^" -." '.'...'.-_"-'~'-Me~ch~4t_1981_
Olacars 1~ Pg 2, add to hia ~tatameat uqder
Oommeqts from the Commiaeionere~ "He atated thet
khe populatfoa increaee of aoroe 1000 pereone up
~i to tha yeer 2000 clted !n Che Comp Blan wee
uarealietinelly low. He ssid theC a moxe realleEic
pro~ection would be about 500 pereoae per year on
tda basln of tha iccreaeee xe heve had over Che peak
30 yaare. Thi• uould lead to an lnoreaea of poeslbly
10,000 pereone up to tha yeer 2000 which would leeve
tha ciCy waefully ehort of paxk aad open epaca !f
khe Fadaral poliay oE alloaing 10 acree of euah la¢d
Por uvery thouea¢d reeidente Were followed. He felt
thaG Ehe opportunitiea to acquire park laad are not
going to exier in yeara Co cnme aqd thet Che ciCy
ehould aggraseively pureub eay acquieltloa optiona
ava4lable to it."
2) PS 7, 4th paragraph, laet liee--otrike "in thie
p2an" aad lnaerr !!by Metropoliten Council in deCer-
mining that Hounde View'e Eair ehaYe of low and
moderaEa income houeing Se 220-250 unirs through 1990."
3) Pg 7, add to Lie reaeon for nay vote: "6peciflcally
tha plan ie e~eded vith goale and policy staeemante
that are almoet obeequioue with raepect to accomodating
regioaal low and modarete income wants. He did not'£eei
that it was aeaeeea.ry to ovaretate ehe commieeton'e
cenc?rn fos theee groupa ia order to act ia an even-
'~~, ha¢ded manuer or that it wae naceaeary to txy aad
(~,- imprees the Mat Coup~il wlCk euch wordiQg. He felt
that the plaq was the city'e and as euch, ik ehould
honaetly projact the needa end aEhitudas of ite populace."
Warren: Yg 6, Loeding/Warren'e moCion--c4e¢ge "outlet"
to "outlot".
HOTION/Becond: MeCartt~yOMiller moved to approve the 2-4-81
minutes ae corrocted. ~
7 ayee 0 aaye
Official Aoee reviewed the proposal. Mr. Jackeon
waa prneea¢ nad 4ad noChing to add. Comm3eef.oner.e
were concerned that thie property wae eurroucdad by
eingle family propert4ea.
Commente frcm the Commisaionere:
Breeke: Ha had no objections to tha rezoqing if
it wae in liqo with the Compreha¢aive Plan.
Flaeren: She atsted eha hae futura queetionm thet
will raquire soma further f.nvnstigatioa.
McCarthv: She aeked how reaidenta rrould have
accaeu eo ilwy 10. Mr. Jnckeon said Chera vould
be an exit to Nwy LO ae r~all aa a tura-around.
E. ; LoedlaA: He referred to Che Compreheneive Plaa
t~~~~ and pointed out that acceea ehould not ocaur
directly off the highasy. He uxpreesed concern
for the impact oa tha surrouud4ag R-1 propertiee.
lM07fI0N CASRISb.
3. Jamen 8. .lacksua,
2925 HighNay 10
R-1 Co R-2 Rasonlag
(CSee ;3-81) '
MOUNDS VIBW PLANNIN~ COMMIBBION Rugular Meeling
Raga 3 March 4, 2981
""--"'-"-"' -^'-'-'-^"'--""'-'-""~.'.-'--".'-"'--""-'-""-'-.
Mauntia ~ugga~Ced eha Planning Commtselon be
coucerned vith 1) extaneioo oF Knollaood S
~ Bherwood whiah might alleviate the prnblem of
acceae, and 2) the neceee4Cy foz ares reeideote'
lnput. She euggeeted a Pvblic Hearing for thia
purpose. Olaaas added there may ba easaesmanCa
that residents ehould ba apprised of~ eleo.
~OTION/Becondt
matP,er until a
for diecuseioa
property and p
acaes~ to this
of Bpring Lake
Hwr 10 will be
Warren/KcOarChy moved !o table thie
Public Heating le hald Apr11 1, 7 PM,
of the reconing of the Jackson
~eeible etraet exteneione provldin~
psopArty. Reaidante on both eidae
Rd~ Ardan, Otoveland, ae well ae
nokiflad.
7 ayea U naye
lfOTION/6eeoad: ~lazer/Miller moved to remove
Che Jama~ A. Trapp raqueaC from the table.
7 eyea 0 uayn
(HOTION CARBIED.)
HOTION 4AARISU.
4. JBmoe A. Trappe
II018 6uanyeide Rd.,
Oond. U~e Perait
Caee 71-80
Loedina falt limitatione for aceaseory buildinge
should be modlfied. Ccnditional ueu applicatione
for eize of acceoao:p bui.idinge migfit be con-
si3ex~d, but wauld probably ba unentorceab2e.
Hti auggaeeed parhaps thare aas a aeed to change
E~ preaeat llmitatioae uniformly rnd make exceptione
°~:~ only ia nxCrama conditione.
KaCSrt6v aae opposed to tha permit becauea it
would ba imposeible to eaforca. She did¢'t feel
a¢aed to raiee the aiae limitations on theee
bulldi¢ge.
Olacer coucnrred with McCarthy.
Garran " " "
M113er " '~ "
Breaka " " "
HOTIOt:/Snconds Warren/HeCarthy movad to approve
Aesolukion08-81 am writtco. (Thie reaoluCion Se
attached to thase minutes.)
6 ayea i¢ay (Mountin) HOTION CAR&IBD.
Hay voka: Mounein voCad nay bacauee ahe beliavan
that, under the preaena code eoction 40.04 D.,4.,
the condStional use i• parmittad !n sn A-1 uee
dletricC !n exoeea o£ 216 eq. ft. She recommeaded
raviaw of the coda, ahare was generel dieagraamant
from several Commiaslonate oc thie poiat.)
Chairpereon Mountia advieed rir. Trapp of his ri~hta
Co a~peal if ha wishasi hie requast wili ba Foraarded
P Ciey Council.
~
MOUNDS VIBH PLANHINa COMHIBBION Regular Maeticg
Page 4
".--"--'-'~..'-""-'---'.'-'..-."--"."-""- March 4 1981
""'.'_"--~""i"'-_ •
Official Aoee axplalaad eha propoeal. He pointed 5. Brooke Superette/Hr.
out Ghak city recorde did noE reflecC where Ghe Don~t~ 2991 Hxy. 10~
tsr/aewer eervleee are aC preeant. Yf it le bevalopmant Propcrsl~
~era percaived, the applicante aill locate the Oonditiooal Uea Parmlt
rervSces e propar disEance #rom Mr. Donut. Mr.
Jack Wa1rV~ waa praeeat and ahowed from ehe eite
plan whare the required 31 parkiag epacee uf.ll be,
ae wall ae th~ additlonal 16 in the pump area,
Roee polnCed out thaea additiooal epacee will have
s covanant for uea by borh Hr. Doaut and Bcooke
8upasette. Nr. Walch axpreeaed daubr tha~ the
addieional apacae would evar be needed,
HcCarth,x expresaed coacern about parkipg. She
inqu3rad Sf the fa¢ce would be maved ta
accomodate parallal parkiag. Welah eald it
would uoc be neceueary bseause thara wae
ample room for nufficSenC parking, ae well
as Rl~rcug4 trefFic.
Brneku Snquired whether lha loCe maC minimum
requiremeate; thie aae afflrmed by Offlcial Roee.
MOTI~Seconds Breske/HcCarhhy movad t~ dLract
Staff to writa a reeolution approving tha Mr. Donut/
Brooks Saperette requaet, l.ncludiug: minor sub-
divielon; conditional use permie Por Hr, Donut;
S~Sat ~~yere egaeemeat for parking; developmeat
,~r~raemene conoidaratlLne.
`~aqas 0 aaye
HOTION Bacond: LoedLag/HcCatthy moved to tamove
Oaee 68-BO from tha table to diecuee.
7 ayea 0 naye
(MOTION CAARISD.)
HOTION CABRISD.
6. Carley Pattarn 60.,
4751 Muetang Lana
Aezoning (I-1 to I-Z)
Ceee 68-80
Loedin~ felt 1) approval of the I-2 rezooi¢g
pould be "opot eoning" and 2} the lncation near
floving vater raloee envlroamenCal questione.
Hr. Carley wae preeenb and eaid he did not feel
the foundry would do anything to deatroy the
anviraamant.
McCerthy wae aguinet I-2 iu that area and falt
it would be unFair to tbe neighbori¢g I-1 properCy.
Wszren was not in favor of rezoning beceuse tha
developmane would be ad~acent to reeidanttal areas
and ne4r Rlce Creak.
Millnr po4ntcd out thera N9BQ~C a large demand for
xesoning of this Cype.
Bre~ka falt pethape Ehare wae sa incoasietency
bstveen I-1 end I-2. Mountin ehated that tha
advancamauC oP tanhnology vould favor axpaasioc,
buC not necesearil~ zeaoaing to I-2.
~
' MOUNDB VIEN PLANNINO COMNI80ION Aegular Maoting
Poge-s•_-...-.-..• ........................,.....-...... .._...March~4~_1981_
MOTION/Bacoadt WarranlMLlLaY moved to acoept
Reeolution No. 09-91, re2oning requeat for Carley
f- tturr Co. (The resolutian ie attached to theee
~
~
nuteel~
o~ye~ 1 nay (Nountin) HOTION CARRIiD.
~, Nav voe~t Hountin d!d noC fael thn ptoparey
~hould ba rasoaed but tha raeolutioa doenn'C
~ raflaa! bha naed eo oon~id~r bringing our
pres~nt I-1 indu~Orial u~e~ to current
ktchnologicsl d~volopmant through conditional
uoe permlts Co the typ~s oP lqdu~tries that
vould be cocpstible. (Harren did noe Eeel
ehie pae garmeine to thie ~seue,)
Mr. Carlay sald ha needad e dafinite "yes" or
"no" •s roon Ra poesf.bla.
Hrasks axpraeeed tha Eaeling Ghat Pianalog Cummi~eion
had rid~~tsppad Lha lo~u~ and lad tha •pplicant o0
by ~llowing h1~ eo puraua t81a xaquaer aad norr it
i L~r bacoma unde~lrable.
I MOTIONI$~condt Arrren/Hlllax maved that th• Plsnning
, Commi~~ion, by mid-Aprl1, r~view ehs cure~ut eode
r~quir~mont~ for indu~Erl~l epplicatloa Pcrt
i
1) poes153a modificaCion 2) updatiqg 3) ailouabla
~ u~as, or 4) or leaving tha ~ama.
ey+~e 1 nay (~lazar) MOTION QAR[lIBD. '
-- ~ voi~~ Olaaar l~lt CAay h~d ~ufficiant
inlotm~tion ~nd opportunity to ravlaw tho
r~qw~t and it should ba ~udg~d on ite ovn marito.
Plaoniag Cnmmia~ioc w~e a~kad by Oity Counell to 7. Law Dao~lty (A-1 6 R-2) ',
~ddz~u &-1 to R-2 conc~r~Lons. Requir~m~nts b tlrit~ria
for Razoning--Racommanda-I
Mountin amphe~iaad ehaC Planning Comwi~~loa tion eo City Oouncll
vants all tetonlag sppllca0lon raqn~~t~ to
weot all r~quiremaot~.
Lo~dipa ~~ld th~t compstibility baCvaan 8-1 6 I
8-2 !~ naaded to avuid "~poe caaiag". This
l~d to • dl~cu~rion ot Ch• datinitiona ot i
"loq dan~ity" and °~pat cooiog".
MOTiONJS~candt Lo~ding/br~~ka mov~d to acaept
&~solutlon 30-81 a~ corr~ctad. (Thio r~~olutioa
is att~cdad ta •:~e mLnuCe~.)
7 ayaa 0 n~y~ NOTION CARSI6D.
Plancing Qommisaion axtnud~d th~oks to Commi~~ion~r 8. 8~comm~ndelloa tc
Hre~ka Lor hi~ raviaN ot th~ Atcd~n Hills Compr~- Approv• Ard~a Hill•
,~iansive Plant his rapor0 i~ aitac6ad ro theo• Coop Pl~n, A~r.6-81
}nutes.
~TION S~cond~ Sra~kalMf.ll~r ¢ov~d to spprova
e~o ut an -81.
7 eye~ 0 nay~ MOTION CARBIBD.
• MOUNDS VIE~ PIANNINO OOMMi88I0N Regular MeeCiag
Pa~e 6 Hazch 4, 1981
i Pla~ning Commiealon extanded than a eo Oommieeioner 9, Recommeu at on to
Warren for har revlea of tha 9horaview Compre- Approve 9horeview
~ eqeive Plan; hep report ie aCtached to Cheae Comp Plan, Ree. 5-81
~ ~nutae.
There wae coneiderable diecuealon ao to ahether
or not Sb.oreviaw euificlantly addeeeeed Ehe eirporC
quaetion.
NOTION/Becand: Warren/Miller moved to approva
Reeolueion 5-81 as arStiten.
Note -- Shoraview'e diecuesion of tha airport }.~eus
leaVee ue in doubt ea to what thoir contingency
plane might be, i.e., lnvite them to reapond,
Miller fele the Mounde Ylew City Council
ehould aek Bhoreviev CiCy Council about
kha alrport ieeua, rather thao include in
thd re~olutiaa.
Harren agreed wlth Millar.
Olaser fe.lt Ehe alrport iesue ehould be
cddreseed in the reaolutioa.
McCare6v ngreed with 6lazer.
Loadina " " "
8raeka " " "
.MOTION/8acond: Rlaaer/McCarthy moved to Cab1e Che
~CSon on approval of Raeoluriod 5-81 for further
Lecuseioa to formulete the languege to addreee Lha
eirport lesue.~
6 ayee 1 aay (Breeke) MOTION CARRISD.
Hev voCe; Braeke doeen't feel thin would be
coneletant with the other approvale slready
given to other communitiee.
MOTION/Sacond: Braeke/MeCatthy moved to approve 10. Racommendation to
ChepCar 32 antitled "Plapniug 4ommiseion" ae Approve Chepter 32,
corrected. (The Resolutlon ie attachnd.) Reeolutioa 7-81
7 eyea 0 naye MOTION CARRISD.
H02IOti/Sacond: Loeding/McCarthy moved to apptove 11. Recommendation Eo
Che Compeshenaive Plan uprlate "COmmunity Imyrove- Approve CommpniEy
meot Plan" enb~ect ta final proofreading, Improvemank Plen
7 ayee 0 naye
MOTION CARRIED.
I Clazet reported that the county hae 9 euch 12. M.T~.C. Patk-Ride
k facilltiee planned~ ewo of which ovarlap aith Yacility, Caee 74-81
~ the etate'e fecilitiee. Tao nearby areae ara for
I 6 35W and 96 & 35W. They havun't gotten Eunding
i t r.oet eetimaeas ware low compered r,o tha coat
j L•imata pro~acted by the etate for building ona
~ ~f Hwy 10. The etate will be happy to aeaiat with
ehrubbexy or eccaeo requiremeate with reepect to tha
~
i;
MOUNDB VISN PLANNINa COMHI88ION Aegulat Ko~tiag
Psga.I. ...-..~ ....... ..... .....•-_.•..,_____..-.. .--.March.4_tl1981~
County Ad I Paaility. They will taka maasuree
to pravanC runofl iato Rlca Oreak end would do
al•ndesaping ~tretegiae we euggast.
P"
\
„1sa amphaeiced thot thasa plnna ara oot fundad
~
_
aad ers merely a site prefarance aE Chl.e tima.
Nouneia callad etteation to the 11s00 m~odaCory
ad~ournmont.
MOTION/eenonds Sxeska/LOaBing to continua until iit30.
2~ye~ 4 aays (McOarthy, ~laear~ Warran, Hl11er) MOTION FAILB.
HOTION/8acoudt Harran/Olacar to adjourn tha meatipg
ut 11tOS YM.
G ayee ] naye
(Nay Votear MounCin, Loeding~ Bree!ca) ,
ACCendaace ae vorkehop eese4ona:
CIP Norkahop__2-11-81
Neil loeding
Ran Breeke
Jun Hillar '
Bob Olaaer
Jo~ib Yarran
~ P~g Mouqtia
0lfiaial-~ROea
I
`~ Asaular Aaanda Maetina 2-1N-81
Bob ftlacer
J~an Millar
Joo!• Warran
Ran Braeke
N~il Loeding ~ ~
Pag Mountin ~ ~~ ~~
OfPic~aY &o~e
(Oharon McQaxthy--excu~ed), ,
CIP Worksho~2-25-81
N~il Loadiqg
Jaan Hiller
Shaeoa McCarthy
Koa Bre.eke
Jo~ia Warren
Peg Houtttin
OfEicial Rose ,
Bob Glaxer
Joi¢t NaetlnR with Park Commissioa 2-26-81
Sharoa McCarthy
Nail Loadiag
Bob Olacar
,~~.„, Jas¢ Ntller
l 1 Peg Mountiq "
~r~ Offirial Roee
MOTION OARBYSB,
13. UHAIRMAN'8 RSPORT
t; :
'f
i
;.. .. _ , ,_ . , t
<;ry ~
M1}`~2Mtm:¢.. ~
_. ~
. ..
,.:
.:. .. .r '• ~~.. . .. . ,,. .. - ....'_
,. .,~... .~ .. . . _ . _~
. . .. ....
, • 'r, n~~'.; ~ ~ ~ :
~~ j
~
'
~
~ ~ ~
~
,
Y q ~r.1
~1 ~
r ~ ~' ,.~r ~ ~., •, , :~ ~; ~~
~!, ItE804UTI0N N0. 05-81
(,,
,
,_.,~ CITY OF MOUNbB VICW
f
, CQUNTY OF RAM9EY
9TATE Or MINNESOTA
~ I2E30~UTION RECOMMPNDING APPAOVAL OF BHOREVIEW
° COMPRCt1ENSIVG GUID~: PLAN
r ~
WHEREA~t, the Mnunde Viow Planning Commiseion hae
reaeived tlie City oE Shoreview~s Proposad Comprehen~ive
Guida Plan for Eormal reviewt and
WHEREHS, tha Plan has been Eormally reviewed~ and
WHERCAS, the Planninq Commiesion hae rasponcled to the
Plan in e complementary manner with rc+epeat ttl the Mouhde
Viow Plan'Update~
NOW, TNEREFORE, BE IT RE60LVED that the Mounde View
Planniny Commieeioh recommends to the Ciiy Counail approval
of the City oE ehorev:lew's Propoaed Comprehenaive Guide Plen~
Adoptad this day pf. 1981.
c~
\'J
; ATTEamt
~
~'! , ~ , ,
_ _, ; a rperaon
i
~$~AL? , ; ' ~ ; {
~, ,. ,
u ng & Zon ng 0 c a '
, ..,,
f
, l .. `
~
,;, . ; ,
, ~ ..
,
,
.
;.
i
~ v , ,. ... . ' 4 ~ , .
~
i
,~
, ' ~ ~~e ~ _ . ~ .. .
Y ~ i
'~ ..~ ,. . ' - ,
~~iw ,,., .... ..... .,.. ~,,. .- a~ ,+.~ ,...~..x~,_ ,...a.,.,...... ~ ..,..i~,.,,.a. ~v.., x ._... ,:,<..~fr4"ifTiA.l+s=~~&.,):'ua.iS~Y:l~'
~~
°fV.:w
i c ~... u•.;-
RESOLUTION N0. 05-81
CTTY OF MOUNDS VIEW
~''"" COUNTY OF RAMBEY ~ 'I
BTATE OF MINNESOTA
R~90LUTSON RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF 9HOttEVIEW
~ COMPAEHENBYVB GUIDE PLAN
WHEREAB, the Mounde View Planning Commiesion hae
reae!.ved the City of Shoreview's Proposed Compreheneive
Guide Plan £or formal review~ and
WH~REA3~ the Plan hae been formally reviawed~ and
WNEREAS, the Planniqg Comir.ieaion'has reeponded to the
Plan in a oomplementary manner with reepeat to the Mounds
View Plan Updatet
NOW~ THEREFORE~ 9E IT AE60LVED that the,MoUltda view
Planning Commiesion reaommends to tha Citiy Couhoi-l approval ,
~, of the City oF Shoreviaw~s Propoeed Gomprehenaive auide Plan:
Adopted thia day of .. 1981.
~ ','
~
\i ' f~TTLY~IA. . . . . . ~~ '
~' '~
~
~~ V
ISMWS W'Y-~L~i..r. ~ . . • v .~~ .r.......ur ~ ..i.~xat +~~..~. .~ ..~i. ....i. ... , . '
~ ~. ~ . .
,,.<,,: ,
~
,
RESOLUTION N0, Ofi-81
CITY OF MOUND9 VIEW
COUNTY OF RAM6EY
STATE OF MINiJESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING A2PROVAL OF ARDEN tiILL5
' COMPREHEN3IVE DEVEL~PMENT PLAN
WHEliEAS, the Mounde View Planning Commieaion hss
reoeived the City of Arden Hille Proposed Compreheneive
Davelopment Plan for formal review~ and
WHEREAS, the Plan has been formally reviewedp and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commi9aion hae reaponded to the
Plan in a complembntary manner with reepeat to the Mounds
View Plan Updatej
NOW, THEREFORC, BE IT. RESOLVED thati the Mounds View
Planning Commir,aloli reaommends to the City Council approval
of the City of Arden Hilla Proposed Comprehenelva Development
Pian.
Adopted this 4th day o£ Marah, 1981.
ATTESTs ~
(SEAL)
~
i , i ~
`/
l~,_.. . ..~„ .. _ ,.,,, ...
C a rpereon
„ Hu~ d nq & zon ng oEf aial
, ~ ~ . ~' '
~ '
,
.,. :,. ....,.. , „_.. :,.. ,.~.,,.~, . , ,,., ~. ,
~
i
i
i
RE30LUTION N0. 07-81
~ CY'PY OF MOUND9 VIEW
COUNTY OF AAM9EY
- STASE OF MINNE50TA
RESOLUTION RECOtM1GNDING THE AUOPTION OF REVISED '
CHAPTER 32 ENTITLED, "THE PLANNING COMMI59ION" j
WNEREAS, the Mounds View Plamti.ng Commieaion during the fall
~of 1980 Yeviewed Chapter 32 entitled, "The Planning Commieeion" for
update ahangesi and
WHEREAS, along with modifiaati.one to Chap+_er 32, t,he Planning
Comml.aeion ~roposea ko adopt bylawe for its governanr,e and for the
transaction of its busineasj and
WHERE118, there was a joint meating between the Planning com-
mieston and City Council on I'ebruary 2, 1981, to discuss the revieione
of Chaptar 32 and its bylawaJ and
WHEREA~, modificationa were..suggeated on February 2, 1981, by
the City Council~
~ NOWr THEREFORF., BE IT RL•'SOLVED that the Mounds View Planuing
~i~, Commiasion recommende the adoption of Chzpter 32 entitled, "The
P ~ Planning Commission", as revised by tha City Council on February 2,
~4n/ 19A17
BE IT FURTBGR RESOLVED that the Mounda VieN Planninq Cortuniesi,4n
intende to use tho attacheu bylaws to govern ite meatings.
Adopted thia 9th day of March, 1981.
ATTESTt
C a rpereon r
(SEAL)
, Su ng & Zoninq O, .c c.1 ~ ~
~
,~~;;..,:,,.. . _....___ .
• ' i
RE80LUTIUN N0. 08-81
~ CITY OF MOUND3 VIEW
COUNTY OP` RAMBEY
3TATE OF' MSNNEgCTA
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING PLANN2NG CABE 71-80 I
WHEREA5, the Mounde View Planning Commiesivn hae reviowed Che
spplication oP James A. Trapp reqarding aaaessory building at 8018
Sunnyside Roadi and
WHEREAS, this pieca of proparty is similar to other propertiee
in the immediate neighborhood and in the City ae a whole~ i.e., not
unique in aharaoterl and
Wt:ERF.AE, tha Mound3 View Code Section 40.04 Subd. D(4) limiting
khe size of an acces.sory buil,ding to twn hundred sixteen (216) equare
feet and na more than twenty five (25) pexcent oE the rear ynrd ie not
restrictive, when applied to the propezty at 8018 Sunnyeide Road, but
rather maintains a uniEormity which anhancea the properties in Y.his
communityJ and
WHEREAS, the applicant haa not demonetrated the exiatence of
unnaceseary hardehip unique to the propertyj
~ f' 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REoOLVED that the Mounda View Planning
~+.,./ Commisaion recummends to the City Council that the requeat foz condi-
tional use, to conatruc~ an accessory building which would be in
exc:eas o£ the City Code allowance oE two hundred sixteen (216) aquare
Eeet, ba denied. ,
Adopted this 9th day oF March;~ 19d1.
ATTEST: , '
C a rperson
(SEAL) ,
u .,ng 6 Zon ng O c a
V
1
i
i
AESOLUTION N0. 09-81
l,~rl
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMS&Y
&TATE OF MINNESOTA
RECOMMENDATION TO THE C~TY COUNCIL REGARDING PLANNIt1G CASE 68-80
WHEREAS, the Mounda View Planninq Commiesian hae reviewad the
application of Fra:ik Carley, aka, Carley pattern reqardinq the requeat
to rezone L•he property at 4751 Muatang Lane from the existing I-1
fLight Indttetrial) to I-2 (Heavy Industrial)~ and
WHEREAS, Mounds View Cade Sect±on 40.20, Subd. B(16) claesities
the Carlay Foundry propoeal as I-2 (Heavy Induatrial)t and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in'Land Use goals
and policieE directs the Ci~y to "develop a coheaive land uae pattern
whi.ah ensure.s compatibility and f::nctional ralationship amonq activi-
ties and land usea" (g~al 1), and
to "accomplish transitions between distinctly differing types of land
uses in an orderly Eaehion which dues not create a nagative (economic,
social, o~; phyaiaal) impact on adjoining developments" (policy a>, 8na
WHEREAS, that same Plan directs the City to "ensure that commu-
nity devalopment is compatible with features of the natural environmant
~\ and is accommodated withbut 3estroyinq envirenmental seatures and natural
( i amanitiea~ (qoal 4), and
~~-~ the "devAlopment shall be prohibited on wetlanda, flood plains and other
natural f~nturea that perform public pratective functiona in their nat-
ural state" (policy a)~ and
WHEREAS, the property at 4751 Mustanq Lane, the proposed, eita
Por rezoning zo Heavy Induatrial is adjaeent a zesidential area of
Mounds Viaw and adjacent to Rice Creekj
NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED.that the Mounde View Planning
Commission recomm~,nds to the City Cowicil that the request to rezone.:the
prpperty et A751 Mustang Lane from the exiating i^1 (Light Indnstrial)
lo I~•2 (Heavy IndusL•rial) be danted.
Adopted this 4Eh day of Marah, 1981. •
ATTEST:
C airperaon
(SEAI.j
~~ Bu xng & Zor~ ng O c a
~
j5€c«,.: . ..,. _.
_~
RE90LUTION N0. 10-81
CI'PY Ofi t40UND8 VIEW
~1, COUNTY OF RAM3F~Y
STATE OF MINNE3C7TA
AEAOLUTION RECOMMENDING CHANGES IN REGULATIONS OF R-2 HOUSING
WHEREAS, the City Council has asked for recornmendations from
the Plar.ning Commission on th~ isaued of R-]. to R-~ conversions
within the low deneity description given i.n the Comprehensive Plan~
and
WHEREAS, R-2 along with other higher danslty types oE housing,
can have neqative impacta upon the predominant R-1 typof and
WHEAEAS, the Planning Commisaion deems that naeded R-2 housing
can be provided while any negative impacts can be minimized bp avoid-
ing diaperalon of the R-2 or conversions from R-1 to R-2r
"?IOW, 'PHEREFqRE, HE IT RE30LVED that the Planning Commisaion
recommenda that conversiong oF existing R-1 atrttetures tr~ R-2 nnt be
a110Wedj
BE IT FCRTHER RESOLVELI that r,h9 following are al~o recommendede
,!" 1. R-2 propexty ehould be enhanced b'y requiring' minimum
(
i~~ 100~ frontaqe and a aquare footage oF 16,500 Eor interio«
lote, 125' frontage and a aquaze foolcage of 18,750 For
corner lots, an~ side yard setbacka of 15'j and
2. R-2 should continue tn be clasaified as "low'densi~y"
haueinq even though technically it may not fieet the low
denaity definition of 2-3 unite per acrei and
3, R-2 housing ahould be reatricted to the periphery of'
low denaity zones in areas where it would provide txana-
itio» to higher density residential or other more i,nten-
slve land uses. Such R-2 areag should be des3qnated on
the zoning maps and th9 cumpreheneive plan chould lae
amended to raflect guch designation.
4. The foregoing recommendations ahould he reviewed by the
City Attorney for implementation.
Adopted thie ~flday of ~Ylac~ 2982,
ATTEST:
i
'
C a rperson
~ (SEAL)
9ui181ng 6 Zoning OEEicial ~