|
<br />Minutes of Special Counpl I Meeting
<br />~age four
<br />
<br />February i8, 1915
<br />
<br />The apparent negative impact from the neighborhood, because of noise,
<br />drainage problems, traffic, headlight glare, etc. was discussed, as
<br />was the concern that the project could fail. In this discussion, it
<br />was gener~lly felt that the noise, drainage, traffic etc. could be
<br />resolved, and Peterson said that TCCH has the same concern as the resi-
<br />dents that the project not fal I - TCCH money is Involved. He said there
<br />Is a "crying need" for housing for the elderly, and after researching
<br />the need, find that the need Is in this area - Arden Hills.
<br />
<br />Wingert asked where simi lar housing for the elderly is located.
<br />
<br />Peterson said that Central Towers (St. Paul) and Ebenezer Towers (Mpls.)
<br />are similar centers, only on the tower aspect.
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Wingert expressed concern re transportation and recreation for the
<br />residents in this comparatively remote location, as compared to those
<br />In t~e urban loc~tions described.
<br />
<br />Saterbak descri bed othe r centers I n Davenport, t owa, Mil waukee, Wi scon-
<br />sln. Des Moines,lowa, which are suburban in nature, but slmliar to this
<br />proposed project these are different only in that they are profit
<br />motivated.
<br />
<br />Woodburn commented that, in his opinion, a project of this type can't
<br />fal I - there is a need, and a community responsiqi I ity to take care of
<br />the aged. He said he will, however, "get sticky" lIbout density - no
<br />advantage in crowding these residents, any more than anyone else.
<br />
<br />After discussion, Peterson and Saterbak indicated they would I ike to
<br />amend their plans in accordance with the changes suggested; Indicating
<br />they could have the amended plans prepared for Council consideration
<br />within 60 days.
<br />
<br />Wingert moved, seconded by Feyereisen, that Council defer action on
<br />Case No, 14-38 until Apri I 7, 1975, pending receipt of further infor-
<br />mation from applicant. Motion carried unanimously.
<br />
<br />Case No. 75-4. E. Lawrence Anderson - Lot Split
<br />Planne," Fredlund described the lot, at the northwest corner of Valen-
<br />tine Par~as a comparatively difficult lot on which to build, but the
<br />owner has indicated he is aware of the problems involved, and feels
<br />he can build homes without requiring variances.
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Fredlund reported that the Planning Commission recommends Council
<br />approvai of the lot split, as ~equested.
<br />
<br />Wingert moved, seconded by Feyere1sen, that Council approve the lot
<br />split, as requested in Case No. 15-4, in accordance with Ordinance 98
<br />Section 13E, as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
<br />
<br />(It was noted that no park dedication for this lot split is required,
<br />and It is the understanding of the Council that no variances will be
<br />requested on these lots by the developer).
<br />
<br />Case No. 15-5, Mounds View School District - Building Permit for Acces-
<br />sory Building at Val~tine Hills E~ntary School.
<br />Planner Fredlund reporfed that the Planning CommiSSion recommends that
<br />the Council approve the Issuance of a Building Permit for the storage
<br />building at Valentine Hills Elementary School in accordance, with plans
<br />submitted; exterior to match brick of present structure. He said the
<br />Pianning Commission considers this addition as a minor change, which
<br />would not substantially affect the Special Use Permit; therefore, not
<br />requiring a publ Ie hearing.
<br />
<br />Fredlund reported that the Planning Commission expressed concern re
<br />Inadequate parking at the school, eSpecially along the west side of
<br />the bu i I d I rig.
<br />
<br />Wingert moved, seconded by Woodburn, that the Counci I approve the Is-
<br />suance of the Bui Iding Permit (Case No. 15-5) for the STorage building
<br />at Valentine Hills Elementary School, with the understanding that the
<br />exterior wi II be of matching brick (alternate A-I), Motion carried unanl-
<br />mOlJsly.
<br />
<br />-4-
<br />
|