01-12-1998 CC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 5 • December 8, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 for a second time at its November 19th meeting and a revised preliminary plat has been submitted to the staff 2 that satisfactorily addresses the three conditions identified in the Planning Commission resolution concerning 3 necessary easements and additional County right-of-way. The fourth condition is in regard to park dedication 4 fees and requires that the applicant pay 10%of the market value of the property for park dedication fees. This 5 would amount to$68,400. and must be paid prior the issuance of any building,grading or other permits by the 6 city. 7 8 Mr.Peters noted that the Planning Commission and staff review of the project has included various elements 9 including landscaping,the signing on site,the architectural consistency,the integrity of the architecture,site 10 lighting and on-site motor and pedestrian circulation,drainage,etc. 11 12 Mr.Mike Black,representing Silverview Estates,Inc.,provided a general review of the proposed 13 development. He noted that the site consists of 13 acres and will include four major structures. These 14 structures include a Holiday Stationstore,a 25,000 square foot office building,a 5,000 square foot office 15 building,and a three-story senior apartment building consisting of 82 units with underground parking. 16 Their development proposal includes three access points to Highway 10,which has received approval from 17 MNDOT. Mr.Black noted that the Rice Creek Watershed District has reviewed the drainage and runoff 18 calculations and treatment. 19 20 Mr.Charlie Radloff, the Site Planner/Designer and Architect and Mr. Charles Plow of Plow Engineering 111 21 provided diagrams showing elevations of the proposed buildings. Samples of the proposed building materials 22 were also presented. Detailed exhibits were also available to indicate the parking lot lighting and pedestrian 23 lighting as well as a landscape plan. 24 25 Mr.George Winiecki,2704 Highway 10,stated he likes the proposed development,but as an adjacent property 26 owner he has some concerns about it. He would like to see the office buildings constructed to prevent a less 27 desirable development from occurring there in the event that later on they find that the intended use is not 28 marketable. .Mayor McCarty explained that the City Council has the authority to approve or deny and 29 amendments to the PUD and that any changes would need to be brought before the council for consideration. 30 Mr.Winiecki also stated his concern about the pond that is on the property now and the stress that will be put 31 on it with the additional development. 32 33 Mr.Peters noted that all issues were addressed as part of the review by the Rice Creek Watershed District. 34 In addition,the City Engineer has also reviewed all of the calculations. The developer's engineers,the Rice 35 Creek Watershed and the City Engineer have all agreed that the surface water management controls are 36 sufficient. 37 38 Mr.Winiecki noted that the holding pond on his property is behind his building. With a new structure being 39 constructed so closely,he has concerns that the water flow will be affected. He wondered if the holding pond 40 could be moved. Mayor McCarty noted that this would need to be addressed by the Rice Creek Watershed. 41 Mr.Peters noted that staff was made aware of this issue prior to the Planning Commission Meeting and as a 42 precaution,they have included a condition in the resolution that requires the City Engineer to review and 43 approve the design to make sure that the storm water flow is not impeded or altered. 44 45 With no further questions,Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 8:04 p.m. 46 • 47 Council member Stigney asked about the trailway with the bridge/walkway which was a part of the original 48 proposal.