09-01-1999 PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission September 1, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 13 • Commissioner Kaden stated that the future redevelopment of County Road H-2 might result in the loss of a portion of the buffer zone. Chairperson Peterson stated Mr. Smith was correct in that there was very little difference in the appearance of the building as that indicated on the plans. He inquired if the rear of the building was also as proposed. Mr. Smith stated they had upgraded it a bit. Chairperson Peterson stated he had originally been concerned in regard to the buffer and the types of trees it contained, and particularly the health of the trees. He stated he had spent time looking at the property, and had found that so many of the oak trees were already sick, and would be gone within five years. Mr. Smith stated that the area had contained an enormous amount of garbage, which required removal, and it was utilized as a meeting place for teenagers. He stated it was not a park area, and since the completion of the project they have had to remove several trees which have died, for safety reasons. He stated they have a very good working relationship with the City Forester in regard to the maintenance of the buffer area. Chairperson Peterson stated one of the purposes of the fence was to prevent pedestrian cut-through, and this would be accomplished if the fence is located behind the building, or connects the buildings. Mr. Smith stated he agreed. Chairperson Peterson stated he did not find the appearance from the • back of the building to be objectionable. He stated that given the choice, he would prefer to look at trees than buildings, however,between the trees, he would rather look at the buildings than the fence. He stated he could not speak for the residents, but he assumed they might come to the same conclusion. Commissioner Stevenson stated that the issue of pedestrian traffic through this area was the major concern. Commissioner Miller stated this was correct. Commissioner Stevenson stated another issue was the shielding of garbage cans, and this would not be lost if the fence were maintained between the buildings. He stated he did not recall a stipulation that the fence be continuous. He stated the developer might not have erred to the degree he thought. •' • . •• - - . -• • - • . • I .. • , •-.•.- • .. -.' . .. , - only been in the original plan, and he was uncertain if this requirement was stipulated in the revised plans. Commissioner Kaden stated he had taken a look at the property, and it appeared to him that part of the building is already behind the fence post, which marks the buffer area, by a foot or two. He stated if this is the case, the developer would probably have no option. He stated, it appeared by sight that the construction was already past the fence line. Mr. Smith stated he was uncertain. He stated he thought the fence post was located just behind the building. Commissioner Kaden inquired regarding the measurements taken by Community Development Director Jopke and Planning Associate Ericson. Jopke stated they had determined the area from the 410 center of the road to the fence post at the Edgewood Drive entrance to be approximately 84 feet, which would indicate a 33 foot right-of-way, with an approximate 50-foot buffer area.