HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 05-23 PC MINUTESMay 23, 1995
Paul R. Emeott, Mayor
3960 Scheuneman Rd.
Gem Lake, Mn 55110
Dear Paul:
The Gem Lake Planning Commission met Tuesday, May 9, 1995,
7:30 PM, at Tousley Ford. Present were Gardner, Docken, Nielsen,
and Emeott. The notice of the meeting was published in the White
Bear Press on May 3.
Mr. Nielsen reported the status of the LaBore Road
extension, having recently attended a meeting in Vadnais Heights
on the subject. The road is still in the planning stage, and
tentatively calls for a parkway -type road through White Bear
Township with 25 mph curves. There will be some minor destruc-
tion of wetland. The question of semaphores is unclear. He also
indicated that VH intends to complete the extension of Wolters
Blvd. to Hwy 61, with the addition of a semaphore at that inter-
section. That will, presumably, move Some truck traffic off "Ell.
We then turned to the issue of updating the Comprehensive
Plan, which was most recently drawn in 1978. Although the
primary goals of the City have not changed significantly in 17
years, the consensus was to hire a planner and update the
document. Gardner will contact Barton-Aschman (the original
consultant) and SEH and report to the Commission on June 12. The
primary concern regarding revision is the continued, and accele-
rating, encroachment of commercial and dense residential devel-
opment by our neighboring communities. we feel that there are
several areas of concern or potential to be considered:
1. the future development of County Road "Ell: how do we defend
our current residential zoning? can we somehow protect the land-
scape border on our side from destruction, and improve/intensify
the border in VH? do we need to think about providing some form
of residential development, other than traditional single-family,
with or without a change in allowed density? what is the plan for
developing a bike trail? how do these concerns apply to other
parts of the community?
2. the future treatment of Scheuneman Road: presuming that the
diversion of Otter Lake Rd. to County Rd. "F" proceeds, should
Scheuneman Rd. (now being a city street) be cul-de-saced? or will
the new intersection be designed adequately to significantly re-
duce spillover traffic? should the current 36,000 sf zoning in
the area be changed? should the City attempt to purchase the
golf course to ensure that its future development is complimen-
tary to the City's goals? and, if so, could it be expanded? is
there a better potential use than single-family residential?
(Subsequent to this meeting, Mr. Gardner met with Mr. Bemis and
found him to be receptive to the concept of re -zoning as well as
the possibility of expanding the golf course under City control.)
3. how will the extension of LaBore Rd. impact our residents,
as traffic on that roadway will swell considerably: will there be
some traffic control at Goose Lake Rd.? can we influence VH to
require some significant landscape buffer on their side in any
future development (their zoning currently is commercial and
industrial)?
4. can we do something constructive to improve the quality of
the Hoffman Rd. business district? and coordinate development of
the entire area, despite different landowners?
5. do we have adequate ability to control the pollution of our
lake? is the drainage from the Tousley parking lot a concern?
With far more questions than answers, the meeting adjourned
at 9:00. We have agreed to attempt to meet regularly in the
future on the second Monday of the month, at 7:00 PM, to reduce
confusion.
Respectfully submitted,
David K. Gardner, Chairman
Gem Lake Planning Commission
cc: Planning Commission
City Council
Arend
Magnuson