04-16-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 (Option#2) April 16, 1997 Page 3 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that this proposal meets the purpose and intent of Planned Unit Developments as stated in Section 1120.01 of the Mounds View Municipal Code with the exception of Subd. 4, which requires the preservation and enhancement of existing features. The development encroaches into the protective wetland buffer by approximately 45 percent. The buffer is intended to preserve and protect the integrity and function of the wetland within the overarching goal of comprehensive stormwater management for the City. The proposed development does not meet this requirement. WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that this proposal meets the general requirements and standards for Planned Unit Developments (Section 1120.02)with the exception of Subd. 3 which requires that sufficient usable open space be provided with this development. Only minimal open space is provided, that being the thin strip of land behind the senior building. The benefit of this land to the residents of the senior building is questionable. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that this proposal meets the special requirements and standards for mixed-use PUDs (Section 1120.03, Subd. 3) as follows: Required Provided • Minimum Project Size 5 acres 12.96 acres Minimum Street Frontage 200 feet 960 feet Minimum Property Width 200 feet 780 feet Landscaping, Screening and Surfacing: (1) The entire site,other than that taken up by structures or landscaping shall be surfaced with a material to control dust,drainage and erosion. The applicant is proposing to pave all parking areas, access drives and the internal roadway. (2) A drainage system conforming to the comprehensive storm drainage plan and subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall be installed. The preliminary drainage plan indicates the creation of two NURP ponds, one between the proposed senior building and one at the south easternmost portion of the subject area. At the last Planning Commission meeting, the issue was raised as to whether the second NURP pond was actually located within the delineated wetland area. The applicants indicated that there were other locations within the subject area to accommodate another pond if necessary. The City Engineer was unable to provide comments as to the drainage system capabilities without the run- • off calculations and the ponding specifications. This information would be provided by the applicants at the development stage of the PUD process.