Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 1999 <br /> Regular Meeting Page 3 <br /> Planning Associate Ericson stated staff has consulted with the City Forester who has provided his <br /> . recommendations regarding the landscape plan, which has been revised to indicate appropriate <br /> species, as specified in the applicant's response to the Staff Report. <br /> Planning Associate Ericson indicated, as discussed at previous meetings, the applicant will attempt <br /> to restrict westbound traffic entering the site from County Road I, and the exit at this location will <br /> be clearly marked"exit only," to prevent any circulation problems or potential traffic issues. <br /> Planning Associate Ericson stated another matter brought forward at previous meetings was that a <br /> sidewalk would be required along Mounds View Drive. He referred to the site plan, which indicated <br /> the areas where sidewalks will be constructed, and explained that these sidewalks will adjoin the <br /> existing sidewalk along County Road I. He indicated that a sidewalk would follow the perimeter of <br /> the site, and connect to the SuperAmerica access, to allow for the ingress and egress of pedestrian <br /> traffic in that area. <br /> Planning Associate Ericson stated the specifications for the garbage dumpster enclosure, as indicated <br /> in the plans submitted by the applicant, meet with City requirements. <br /> Chair Peterson noted there had been some question regarding the accuracy of the scale of the <br /> building. Planning Associate Ericson explained that the elevations indicated on the previous plans <br /> were not accurate, however, the revised scale is accurate, and indicates the topmost height of the <br /> building to be 37 feet. He explained that the maximum height allowed is 45 feet, and the structure <br /> is within that requirement. <br /> Planning Associate Ericson stated the applicant does not propose to install any lighting on the <br /> building. He explained the Lighting Plan indicates the proposed lighting, and the foot-candle readings <br /> are all within City Code requirements, in terms of glare, and light spillage onto the surrounding <br /> properties. <br /> Planning Associate Ericson stated no signage plans have been submitted at this time, however, the <br /> applicant has indicated that any signage will comply with the City Code and the Conditional Use <br /> Permit requirements. He pointed out that the Conditional Use Permit sets a maximum size of 32 <br /> square feet for signage, and staff will review the signage based upon this requirement, if the applicant <br /> has not provided plans for this by the next meeting of the Planning Commission. He added that the <br /> signage issues could also be reviewed at the Council level. <br /> Chair Peterson inquired if the applicant has indicated the type of signage they might utilize at the site. <br /> Mike Lewis, representative of MSP Real Estate, the applicant indicated their facilities typically utilize <br /> wooden signs, set in block foundations. <br /> Planning Associate Ericson advised that all of the Development Review requirements appear to be <br /> met, and there are no outstanding issues. He explained that staff will require the plans be revised to <br />