HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-09-05 PC Minutes. •. ~
i ~
~
PROCEEDING9 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNA3 VIEW
RAMBEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
3eptember 5,1984
Mounde View City Hall
2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
-----~--------°-------------------------------------------°------------
The Mounde View Planning Co~niseion wae called to 1. Oall to Ordar
ordex bq Chal~rman Mountin at 7i32 PM.
ML'MSERS PRESENT~ Commiseioners Andereor., ~argQnt, 2. Roll Ca11
er, ore and and Chaizman Mountin.
It wae noted Co~iseLoner Warron was absent, with
Commiseloners Quiak and.Lauterbach having excused
ab~ences.
ALSO PRESL~NTt Public Worke/Coc~unity Development
rectur atcher.
It wae noted Councilmembar Blanchard wae abeent.
~~ Motion Second; Forelund/Mi.ller ta H*~?PY.QY9 the 3. Apprnval o£
u y , minutae ae presented. Minutes:
July 5, 1984
5 ayee 0 naye July 25 1984
~ Auguet ~. 1984
August iS~, 1984
~ , Motion Cnrri.ed
Motion Second: Sargent/Anderson ta approve the
7u y , minutas ae presented.
4 ayea 0 nayo 1 abetantion Motion Carried
qmmmieeioner Forelund abatainad from the vote aa
alxe had baen abeent at that meeting.
Motion~ Second: Andereon/Forelund to approve the
ugusA'--1; I'9S4 minutee ae corr~eted.
5 ayee 0 nays Atotion Csrriad
Mation Second: Sargent/Andereon to approve the
ugust , 84 minutee as presented.
4....
~ 3 ayae 0 nays 2 abeentione MoCion Cxrried
Coauniseioners Miller and Forslund abstainad from the
vote aa they had not been preeent at that meeting.
•,Mounde Vi~w Plenning Co~iesion
' Septaflber S, 1984
A
egular Meetir~
-------------~-°--~--------~------^-------------°---^- ps$e ~Q
----
~ ---~------,---
:her~ wa:e na reaidants requccta or commonta from 4, fleaidente
the floor, Requeate ~nd
Commente from
the Floor
Jerry .F.neen of Holiday Station Storee introduced 5. Roliday Station
John 3hardlow, of Howard Dahlgren Aesociates, the 3turae, Inc, ',
planner they had eelected to review their plan, He Caee 153-84
etated that whila the Planning Commieeion had aalced
them to refer the plan to David Licht, theq had I
choean to gn with their own planner, j
Mr, Shardlaw etated the key iesue ie whethex ~r not ~
thie ie an appropriaCe uee oE the eite, whiah is
preaenCly zoned B-3, but which the C~mp Plan propoees ~
as medium density reaidential. He revie*aed hia mano
of 3e~tembar 5, 1984 tc tkie Planning Commiaeinn, and
atated that he feels the B3 zoning ahould goverrt tha ~
use of the property. He aleo
pointad out tha i
~
applio~tior. ~ass pre~er.tad at G_L; Hs?1 cn z•+.s; 31, I
and eCata Low eete a limit of 90 days from the time
of applicetiop to act on a proposal, nr the appiiasnt ~
could reque,et a place on the City Council agenda.
Chaixman Mountin raplied the applicat•Lon was rece~.ved ~
on May 31, but the planning reviow did not be.gin until !
Auguet 1, and triey are allowed 60 days 3n whtah to ~
complete tha raview end eend it on to the ~ouncil, !
Bha expla3ned the QiCy aas in the midat ofi tha rezon-
ing hearinge and tabled thie part3cular hesrittg in
d
t
ll
l
h ~
or
er
o a
ow t
a P
anning Comoiseion tiwe to
initiate di.ecuesion on khe Cnmp P1an a~rd Highwey 10
corridor, ~
The~Commiesionera queetioned the traffi,c Plow on `
Silvex Lake Raad, and whethar approval had baen ~
received from RicA Creek Waterehed Dietrict end
how the area would be
t
d P
ll
~ j
pro
ecte
rom po
ut
on, !
auch ae gae flowing oPf L•o othex areas. ~
Mr. Shardlow replied there is no madiwa on Silver
Lake Roaci, and the utat3on would have fiull aceesa
froar Silver Lake Road, and a right in and rsght ~
out on 91ghcaey 10, The curb cut wnuld be spproxi-
mately .116' back Erom the property li.ne. ~
Mr. Jeneen adviaed they had prasented tha plan t4
Rameey Cannty and r6ceivad verbal approval, and
will receivo formal approval upon eubmiealon oP
the grade F~,an. He addnd the Highway 10 access ia
1 ; 160' back Yrnm Silver Lake Aoad, and there ie an
`/ exieting right turn lane. He aleo advisad that
the two etructuree that are presently on tha property
wauld be removed.
Mounde View Planning Cnummiseion September 5, 1984
Rsgular Meating Page Thres
----^-----^--------------------------------------~----------°-----^--°`-
~ Direetor Thatcher re.~orted there should not be any
prablem eeauring appruval fxom the Rice Creek
~ Waterehed Diatrict. Mr. Jensen ehowed tha Caauniaeionere
whera ehe drainage would be, and wharA they will have
on-aite detention.
Director Thatcher advieed a skimmer would take cara
of atty run-off pollution Prom the aervice stat3on,
but ha reco~nended the Commiseionere look at how thie
neighborhuod cot~erciul center would relata to other
neighborhood co~nercial centcre.
Mx. 3hardlow replied this typs of facility doea serve
a neighborhoad convenience fu.iction, and the market
relates more directly ro the zoning, with highway
bu~inese.
Directur Thatcher aeked what type of tanks would
have the leaet amaunt of aeepage, Mr. Jensen
repliad thst th? CtNtR of Minnesota pravidpa very
etrungenC codes for thie type of tn,~k, as to what
ie allowed and how it ie installed, with etandards
and criteria to be met.
Chairman Mountin reviewed the options avai~able bo
~ the Commisaioners, 1) request the appllcant send the
~ plan tfirough the City 's coneultant, Dave Lieht, for
reviPw of the eite plan and to addresa tha Comp P1an
polic~ iesuP; 2) tab2e the propoeal to the nexh
works~op meeting; 3) direat Staff to draft a resolu-
tlon of approval that would include ~peciPia
atandards attd reemmnend axi amendment to the Camp RAan;
4) direct Staff to draft a resolution of denial, and
give the reaeone; 5) requesti Staff conault~the City
Attorney, Rice Creek Waterehad Diatxict, or any othera
Eor additional information, or 6) forward to the Coun-
~i.l with no recommendakion,
Mr. Jenaen ~Ceted thay are atill hoping to get eame
conetruction wo.rk done on thia yet thia year, actd
would like a favorab).e endoreemeet from the Planning
Co~iseion this evening, and have it Forwarded on to
the Cauncil.
Co~ieaioner Mi11<.r e~ated ehe did not see any'
indicstion that Chie ie whst ehe long range plan for
the C1Cy calis for.
Commiesioner Andareon etatad he feelo thie would be
an appropr.late uee for tho parcal of Land, and it
_ ehould be B-3, an~ the Comp Plan ehould be readdreeaed,
~'Co~iesionor Sargent etated he concurred with
Coc~iesioner Anclerson.
Coc°miseioner Millex stated ehe sti11 Pelt the fssue
:,,
Moundo View Plannittg Co~iseion Eieptembar 5, 1984
Regular Meeting Page k'our
--~~--~----------~------------------^---~----~---------------------------
~ regarding the etrip along Highway 10 hae noC bean
~ reeolvad,
ComuieeAaner Forelund eteted ahe concurred with
the othare, and theq ehoul3 resolve the zoning
ieeua, 8he edd~d ahe would like to eee the plane
go on to Dave Liaht.
Mr. J~enean pninted out they first made applica-
tion on May 31, and it wao thair underetandixig the
property case zoned corractly For thie particular
uee, eed they later f~und out there wed a conflict
with thw ComP Pl~n. 8e etated there ia na one way
to plan a particular area, aud he wou.ld hope tha
Planning Co~iaeion woald approve the itam and
paee it on to the Council thie evaning, and make
eny riecesary changae to the Gonp YZan f.ollowiag
thie meeting,
Motion: Mi,ller to forward to Dsve Licht and make
concertad effort to reenlve the ieeue regarding
that ara$ aa it relate~ to Highway 10 an3 ueee
~ along Highway 10. MoCion Fai.led
The moti~n failed ior laek of n aecond,
Mx. Janeen again .n,tated hie concern with the time
element, pointin~ out they hsve bean bafore the
Planning Commieaion eince June, and would prefer
the Planning C;:~3eeion recommend either approval
or denial.
Chairman Mountin pointed out the Commiaeionere
had aeked them to cake the plan to Dave Li.cht
at tha Auguet 15 meeting.
MotlonJSecond: Axsdereon/3argent tol~ave etaff ,
prepare a resalution recommending approvaL~and
Conditional Use Permit with the P].annina Commiasion
'to vote on the rasalution at the next agenda
session, an September 19, at 7:3o p.m., which wil,l
ba a apecial meeting.
4 ayes 1 nay MoCion Caxxied
Chairman Mountin atated ehe vatad againet the motion
~"s ae ehe feels tha reco~muattdation for approval ie not
~ in keepinQ with the epirit and.intent of the Comp
Plan, and it perpetue,tes commercial atrip development,
She added the devalopes has not baen willing to work
through the profesaional plannar oE the C~ty, and
Mounde Viaw Planning Cou~iseian SaptPmber 5, 1984
Reguler Meating Page Fiva
-----------------------------------------°-------------------------°----
'~'~ tljere ie no resolution to tha Comp Plan conElict
~ iaeue.
Chairman Dfountin euggzsted test wella be a condition
Eor the developer. Mx. .Tenean replied L•hexe are
better ways of determining any underground leakage,
such as pressure teeting, or dip atick, and that
appropriate City oEficials would be sble to maka
checka.
The Co~ieaioners diecussed whnt ahould be required
in t'he Conditional Ude Permit and made recomnendatione
to Sta!'E on what• to include,
Director TF.atcher reviewed the situntion of Mr. 6, Charlae L.
Koenig, atating ;.hat he had applied Tor a 4F Koenig
driveway setback variance, which Che Planning Case 155-84
Co~isaion grantad due to hardehip, then xescinded,
There was considerable discueaion among the Commi-
aeionera and Sta£P and Che applicant ae to the
placement of the house and exlstit~,q driveway and
the optione availsble,
It was the cancensus of the Co~isaionere to atCach
~ the exhibit to the old resolution, ehowin~ the
additional driveway to angle over to be 5 Erum the
property line, after paesing the houae, in case a
garage ia ever rsdded,
Motion Second: Forelund/Anderaon to adopt Reaolu-
t on o. -94, approving the varianca requeat o~
Charles Koenig at 7869 Greenwood Drive,
4 ayes 1 nay Motion Carr~:ed
Chairman Mountia voted against the motion ea ehe did
not Eeel there wae a finding o£ hardehip.
Director Thatcher reviewed Resolution No. 120-&4. 7. Edwssd Wezd~.en
Qaea 160~84
Motion Secand: Forelund/Sargent to spprove Reeo-
ut on o. 0-8Y and forward it to the City Council
~efore approval oE the minutes.
5 ayeo 0 naye Motion Carried
Chairman MaurAtin noted the Condii:ional bae Permit
reeolution would be ready for tha epeaia7, meeting on
SepKember 19, which atates the eize of tha building,
~ etnd that ir muet be architacturally compatible with
th~ primary struature, no 8rivswa~y he iaatiall~d, and
that ahould tb~e uee be chenged the oon8itianal uee
psrmit wauld bs null and vaid, and othar x~quirar,ontia.
Mounde View Planning Co~ission September 5, 19E4
~ 'Regules Meeting Paga 31x
' ---°--~--,-^------~----_^___°^----------~--°-^--------~------^°---------^
/'°'~ Diractor Thatchar pointAd out the proparty muet be
'„~f aurveyed before anyehing further ie done,
Motion Secondti $orelund/Andereon to approve P~eolu~
t on o. -84 and forward on to the Councir
prior to the minutae,
5 ayae 0 naye
Moeion Sacond: M111er/Sargent to table diacueeion on
t e tem.
5 ayes Q neys
Motion Cexried
;
8, Diecuea~on ok
Day Care Pacil~t~
iee
Moti~n Carxied
Motivn Second; Anderson/Miilex to adopt Resu2uCion
o. ~ and £orward it to the Council.
5 ayea 0 nays
Motiou Sacox~d: Mi11er/Sargent to edoQt Resolut~,on
o. and gorward to the Couneil.
~ 5 ayee ^ 0 naye
Moti a econdr Miller/qndexeon to table the
act on teai ~:sauasl.on until tha next agenda
aeseion.
5 ayea 0 nays
Chaixman Mauntin reported the attendees at the
Augsset 15 meet~ng were Com^a«seionere Quick,
Sargent, Wszr~n,AndArvon and Chairman Mounttn,
Directur Ttiatcher and Councilmember B1.anchard,
with Commlaeionere Mi11er, LauL•erbach and
Foralund hsving ex.cusad absettcee,
Director Thatchar edt~ised tke Commiesionere thst
$3,000 ie allowed in the budgeC Eoz ~unde toward
education for the Coam~ieaions in the City.
9. Pzsnk La~atka
Ceae 158-84
Motion Carried
10. Bob Ko7.atrrnn
Case 159-84
Mation Caxriad
11, qet~.on Ttema
Motion Cerziod
12, ChaLz~a~nts
Aeport
13, StaR£ Reppzt
Motion~Second: Sargent/M111er to ad~ourn tha 14, Ad,jourttmen~ i
moe~~ng'at "9-52 PM, ~
..~.,..~ !
~ 5 syes 0 naye Motion Carried '
Respec ~1~~~G~/v'/~ ,
teu~~atcher
Dl.zecCOZ of Publ~.c Woxke/Community Uevelopmene?
,.,;~. ,., , _ . _. .
MOUNUS VIBW PLANNING COMMIS9TON
RESOLUTION NO. 104-84
~;a,;
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAM3EY
' ~ ~STATE OP MINN~SOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIANCE REQUEST OP
CHARLES L. KOENIG AT 7869 GREENWWD 6RIV~
WHEREAS, Charlea L. Koenig has applied for a driveway
setack variance of 4 Eeel:t and
WHEREAS, Mr. Koenig hae proved hardehip by defini~ion oE
2oning Code Section 40.26, Subd, 6i and
WHEREAS, the hardahip includes location of the existing
driveway unimproved Eor the last 38 yearei and
WHEREAB, 1S years ago a subdivision occurred placing the
driveway cloaer than 5 feet to the property line~ and
WHEAEAS, the owner, Mr. Koenig, noa roquests to pave ancl
~ improve the drivewayt
NOA',~TNEREFOR~, BE IT F.ESOLVED that the Mounde View
Planning Commission approves the variance for Mr, Koenlg because
~f dua hardahip allowtng the driveway t~ ke placed within ano
£oot o£ the property line Eor appr.oximately 28 Eeeti
~~ „ ~ BE IT FURTNER RESOLVF,D~that the remainder oE the driveway
and a£uture garage must be 5 Eeat from' the property line.
(Please refer to the attached exhibit.)
Adopted this Sth dny.of September~ 1964.
ATTEST:
C a pman
(SEAL) ' ~ , .~
, , , ., ~ ,J~,
~ p rector o Pu 1 c Wor e
C+~+mmunity Developmont
wV ~.
, ,, ,,.:, ~..., _ ,.... ~,w._ ,,.... ...~-,; . ._ .... . . .
. .... . . ° ,.. . , , ,
~:r.~~ v r. . . . ~ .. , . ,. .. .. . ~
, ~ ~
j, ~t .'. i '
'\~~ti93~3 ~ 345~>
. r-
~ t~ECEIVED ~ '
~ arya ~ ~ ,
Ma~os v~Mr~ . ~~ .
~ ~ ~ ~~
e
~,,,
" ~ °I ~r1_~.1 ~,J~ o t'~ rioc,~5~-
;~ / ~ -, ~ _
~! S r- ...:...`,.'.. i ~~
r
~~, D U/~ ULl P ', a
~~ i
, . _ . _...:...._. .... __._... . ~~ ~.
? ~~ ~ , t~ ~ G
`° q '_ ' a s,~ ' y~,
r~y~, • ~~~ ~ ~' k~ ~ , J ~ ~ ~ ' ~ . l~ ~
~ ~,~° ~~~ ~~ - j ~ ~ ~0.~Q9 v ~ : ~
',. 4.~"' A,', _--/9i'" ~y~~ `'
" ~--- Nb'---r-~-~• , - --~- ~ ~ b~
„ .,
~ , Red , J ~N ~, ~ ~ • , 6~~,,~. -f[~'~r
RkY ~ Y ~ ~~ ~ )' , .~~~~~ / ~~ l'1 ~
;~, "! R,o F I ~
~
z i IfI ~
`*i;: ' ~ V , I ; ' , '
y,~, ~._ n r . .. `a ~.~'i , ~ . .. ~
~;- ~ .
y~ . . .. ' F ..~~ ~~, / , . ` .
~~'" ~ . , ~ W. ~ , . ~ ~ . '~ t > >*~.
fF~~, ' ... ~ , . " ,~ }..
Kf " ' ' ~ ( - 4 .
~t ~ . ' / . ' \ '. +W :
~ ~ . , • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~y 1 ~~
~ i ti .
~ i i. '/ . . • ' ~ ~ 1 ~ •~ 9i :
A ~`
~.~,~~ ~ a 3 ~ . , ' ~ ~~
y . o
~ ~ . , , e ~ ~ •'~ 4:
~ ~ ~ ~la'~. S~ ~. , A~.~,
' , ;
~ ,
• .., .
,4 .
, • i, , '~ ~~~~
.. , r .~ i. , .
~ ~ . ~ R ~.~'`~ ~~
6 60 ~ ~ ~
~ 7 r o w,a. ^ ,
c~ -~-- ,,
r c e_ ; ";'
,_...._. _,~.~.~ ~~
F; t:..
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNINa COMMIS9ION
RE30LUTEON N0. 118-94
~,,:
CTTY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAM3CY
BTATE OF MINNESOTA
AE80k~UTION AECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF' DEVRLOPMENT REVIEW OF 5-UNIT
OARAGE A'P 5701 QUINCY STREET
WNER~A3~ khe owner o£ 5701 puincy Btreet, Frank Lepetika,
hae r8quasted appsoval to conetruct a 5-unit gecage on eaid
prope:ty~ an3
WH8REA8~ Mounds uiew Mun3~cipal Code Chapter,59.07 requiroe
a£ormal d9velopment review o£ eaid propoenlj and
WHEREAn, tha property at 5701 puinay 5treel: iu preeently
zoned R-3 an!i 4ae an exieting 4-unit apartment building built
thereon= and
WHEREAS, the conatruction oE tho proposed 5-~unit qarage
~--, would provide Eor garage apaaee now requicad by Code and qbill
previde needed outdoor parkiny ae required by Co~1e~ An3
~' .
WHEREAS, the propoeod 5-unit garage meets minimum eetbeck
raquirements on the lot pzoper~
NOW, THEREFORE, HE ST RESOLVED that rhe Mounde Vlew'
Planning Commieaion recommends approval oP the requeatefl 5-unit
garage to be loaated at 5701 Quincy Street to ths Mounde View
city Counail~
BE IT FURTHEA RESOLVED khak the MoundA ~~iew Planning
Commieeion recommenda approval oP the 5-~anit gerage ae an aaaeseory
buildinq and that a development agreement and/or s~aurity not be
required.
Adoptbd thia 5ih day oY September, 1984.
ATTESTt
C aTi r~man- "-°~
tssni,)
~./
rec or o P o or n
Community Developmunt
..:,:.._....,.,,.. ..: .. . ,
,~'~° .
MUUNDB VIBW PLANNTNG COMMI69ION
~ RFSOLUTIOt( N0. 119-8a
ti_,' CITY OF MOUND9 VISW
CUUNTY OF RAMyEY
HTATE OF MINNESOTA
REBU4UTION R6GARUING DEVELOPMENT REVEEW OF
TWO-FAMILY DWELLING AT 2I16/2720 COUNTY ROAD J
WHEREAS, RoberE Koletrom le the owher of Che pYOperty
known ae 2717/2720 Ceunty Road J and i.s requeatlnp permieston to
oonetruct a two-£amily structure on said proGertyt and
WHEREAB, the property at 2716/2720 County R~ad J ia
preaently zoned a-2, single and two-family dwellinp diat+rick~ and
WHEREAB, the owner, Zobert Kollatrom, raqunete to build
the two-Eamily dwelling, bubdivide it do~rn the canter for zero
lot line purpoees ad eeparate ownerahipj and
WHGREA9, Mr. Kolstrom has provided e eite plen ehnwinq
proper setbacke of the two-family struchure and proposed drAinage
Eacilities~ and
'-`~ WHEREAS, Clty aknEE has received direction £rom Ramsey
~~Jj County with regard bo acceea o£ the grogerty and county ditch
drainage on the psopertyj and
WHEREAB, Ramsey County requeata that Che dralnaga from khe
couhty ditah be di.rected southward through the property und bhen
directed to the west for pick-up by exieting toQogruphy to City
drainage Eacilitieei
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HBSOLVBD that Che M~~unde View
Planning Commission recommends approval to Ehe City Council Eor
Roberk Kolstrom's twc-femily dwelling requeet aubject to
receivinp approval from Ramaey Caunty regardiny the £inal
drainaga proposal and Chapter 49A reguitemenhs Eor eaid
property. The Planning Commiseion elqo direete stelf to,Eorward
theae itume to the City Councii prior to approval oE the minutas,
Adopted thie 5th day crf Septembsr, 1984
ATTESTi ~ ,
C eirmen
43EpL)
D rector o Pu c Wor e
Community Development
~
~"'
MOUNDB VIL~W pLANNIN6 COMMI36ION
~ RE80LUTION N0~ 110-8/
CtTY OF MOUNDS VZL*W
COUNTY OF RAMSSY
STAT~ OF MIHNE6ATA
IiL~80LUTI0N AECOMMENDINO ]~P~AOVAY, OF MItiOR 8I7HDIVI820N
REpUEST OF EDWAAA WERDIEN FOR 6940 BILVER L7~IfE ROAA
WHEREA9, Edward WerdiAn har requeebad a minor subdivi~lon
(combining twa lota into ono)t and
WH~REAS, Mounda View subdivis±on Code re~Quiree that e
oombinatior. o! auch be approvdQ by the Plartning Commieelon and
Gity Counaii~ and
SVkBABAS hhe combination meete nll mini.mum requiramenta
requirad by Mounda View CiGy Coder ard
WH6RER3~ n minox eubdivioion es xaquaetied xequirea that
e eurveyor~e aertiticate be eubmitted~
N6W, THEAEFORE, 8E IT RE99LVL*D tihat the t9ounde View
,-.~ Plsnning Cnmmiseion recommends,approval o! the minnr subdlviaiori
raqueat o! Bdward Wezdien eubjeat to suhmisaion o! e aurvc+yor~s
, cerkilionte meetinq eubdivieion ooAa requiremaitri
BE ST FURTHER RESOLVED Ehat should any irregularitiise'ahox
uy an the survayoz~a aert~tiaete thak the filing ot ths subdivieion ,
ragueet bo dleni~d until ^uoh eime tha irregulari.iiee ara'zpproved
by the Piaaning Cnmmieeian and City Counail.
Adepted thia Sth day of September, 199{.
ATTEBTt
a r~an
( 3EAI,)
6 raotoL o P o or s
Community Davolopment
...,,,
~)
4
;~
i:
:-,.. ._ .. . ,. ,. ~, .,,.,,_~.~. .~ . .... ...... ... . ~ ,. ,. .,. .~ , ._ , .
MOUN~S VSEW PLANNING COMMISOION
RESOLU2~xON N0. 121-84
~cw, CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
( ~ COUNTY OF RAMBEY
. ~. 3TAT~ OF MINN£60TA
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CTTY COUNCSL REGARDING
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE N0. 161-84
WtlEREAB~ Mr. and Mre. Edward WerCien o£ 6940 Silver Lake Road
have requeated City approval for a minor eubdiviaion (2 l~te into 1)
within the Cihy o£ Mounde Viewi and
WHBREA4, they are also requeetiny a conditional uee permit
tor an acoeesory building with a size of 24' by 24' (576 equare
feetyj end
WHEREAS, Chapter AO of the City Code sta~es that if an
eccesaory building is sized in exceas o£ 216 square feet a aonditional
uee permit muet be approvedJ and
WHEREAS, the architsctura o£ the acceseory buildinq wi12 be
compatible ~o the main atructurejand
WHEREA3, the uae of the acceseor.y bui].ding wil7, be Eor home
garden equipment and utenstlas and
~ WHEREAS, kheae ehal.l be no dxSveway to the buildingi ahd
WFiL~REAS, the buildinq shall meet aonstruction crdesj
NOW, THEItEFORE, BE ST RESOLVED that the Moui~ds ViaW Planning
Commisaion reoammende approval of the aondStianal uee permib Eor an
acaessory buildina provSded that thg followi.ng requizemente are
aflherad toi
1) The minor eubdivte.ton muat be platted and recorded as
ona Yot.
2) Othar acoeseory buildingson the lot muat be removed.
3) IP tho uae of the accesaory buildinq chanqes, this
condi*.ional usa permit ~e null and votd.
HE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commisaioa
direct ataFf to Porward this reaolution to the City Cduncil prior to
approval o£ the minutes.
Adopted this 5th day oE September, 1984.
A^.'TE&T ~
~;,, "" a rman
~ } (SEAI.)
~/'
D reo or o P a Wor s R
Community Development ~
~
., i
/'~ MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMIByIUN
f ~ RESOLUTION NO. 123-84
V CITY OP MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE UF MINNEBOTA
RECOMMENDATIODI TO TN~ CITY COUNCIL REGARDIN6
MOUN6S VSEW PLANNING CA9E NO. 1r3-94, HOLIDAY BTATLON BTOREB
WHEREAB, Holiday 9hetion Btoree has requested Clty •
aQproval to a~nstr.uct a gasoline/convenienc~ stora within the
City of Moun~s Viewt and
WNEREA3, cnnetruction af thia gasoline/conventence etore
facility ae requested requires appri~val oE a minor subdivieion
tcombininq 2 lota into 1), conditional use permit, and
devolapmant approvelt and
WIiEREA3, the Rlanninq Commisaicn hae reviewed the BtaEf
Report and hae revieweC a report on the development by John
Shardlow ot Ho~ard Dnhlqren Associakea, inc., the applicant!s
coneultant,.along with information submttted by the applicant
! ~-~ which includes the Eollowings
~
\,J e) Development Plan
b) Bite eurvey
c) Projoct Summary
d) Evidenas oE Proper Bcreeniny en~ Landsaaping~ and
WHEREAS, tha Developur hae declined eubmitting the plan to
pavid Licht, the City consultant, Eor devalopmont review~ and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commiaeion has also reviewed this
pr~posal and it is in conEormance with all chapters of the
Munictpal Codo, apecificelly Chaptere 40, 42, 4" and 49A and
9tat•e Statutee~ and
WHEREAS, this propoeal meeta all r.nquirementd oE Chepters
40, 42 and 49 of the Municipal Code~ and
WHEREAS, Rice Croek Waterahed Dietrict, Mlnnesota
Dapartmnnt oP Traneportetion and Ramsey County will review the
developmant prior fo conetructioni and
WNERBAB, the axiykinq Camprel~onaive Plan racommends that
this area ehould be Qevelopod mAdium deneity residentiel~ and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commiseion hae reviewed the
Comprehensive Pl~n to identify the policy and plnnning iseuos
~ raqarding oontinued atrip commercial developmant on Nighwey l0i
•~.
.
/"'~.
MOUND9 VIEW PLANNING COMMISBION
RE304UTION N0. 123-84
PAGE TWO OF TWO
NOW, TNF.'REFORE, 8B IT REBOLVED thaL t1~e Mounds View
Planning Commiesiort recammends deniel of the request by Holiday
Stetion Stores besed on the following tindinge~
1, Ptopoaed devolopment ie not i» conformanae with khe
existinq CompreheneiVe Land Uee 71an aammerciel goale
and poliaies, and Che epieit and inte~t o[ the
Comprehensive F1en to limit commeroial atrip
development ~n Highway 10,
2. A dev~lopmant review by khe applicant's planninq
conaullnnt, J~hn 9hardlow of HoNard Uehlqren
Aaeocietes, Inc.. did not addreee the gn11ow1nq
plenning iseueay
A, Stacking of peak hour traPfic on Highway 10 end
fiilver Lake Road.
B, TrafEic relaCionehip to propoaed Kinder Care and
~ khe exiating bank operatlon.
C. Ingreae an6 asresa traffic patterns.
p. Noiae and'omisalon6, ~
E. General environmental iesuaa, `
F~ site Utilization.
BE IT FURTHER RE$OLVED that hhe Mounde,View,Plenn~nq ~
Commieaion direct sta£E to Eorw~rd thie resolution and unapproved
Plertning Commiasion minutes aE 8eptember 5, 1984 and Sepbenlber ,
19, 1984 to the City Council prior to approvel oE the minutes.
Adopted thie 19th dey of September, 1984.
~~+ ATTE$Tt
I
l
i (SEALD
~
i
I t '
( ~~%
I
(
~
Cha rman -
D reetor of.PU c Wor 9
Communlty Development