09-01-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

► . PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO • To: Mounds View Planning Commission, From: Rick Jopke, Community Development Director Subject: Request to Change Screen Fence Location at the Anthony Properties/O'Neil Project Date: July 29, 1999 BACKGROUND: As part of the Anthony Properties/O'Neil PUD project (Theater Project) a screen fence was constructed along the County Road H-2 side of the project. The developers have determined that the screen fence is too close to the office building under construction. They are asking that the City approve a change in the location in the fence to deal with the problem. They originally proposed to move the fence 10 feet to the south immediately adjacent to the buildings. They have revised their request to only move the fence 6 feet instead of 10 feet. The fence will remain at its present location in the area between the buildings. The fence will be removed when the buildings are constructed. The fence will remain at its present location until the office buildings are actually constructed. Any trees that may have to be removed would be replaced. The developer has attempted to talk with all the residents on the south side of County Road H-2 • about the proposal. Six of the twelve residents have indicated that they would support the change and three residents opposed the change. They have been unable to talk to two residents. Council Member Thomason lives in the final property and the developer is attempting to discuss the proposal with her. A copy of a petition circulated and a map is attached. ANALYSIS: The proposal raises 2 questions. The first question is: Will the propose change adversely affect the project or the neighborhood. It is my opinion that the proposal would not adversely affect either the project or the neighborhood. The fence location change would not result in any additional impacts and could be done w - - ' . '-- - : --the-50-feet-buffer-area-and-minimal loss of trees. The developer is working with the City Forester to minimize tree loss and to replace trees that are lost with varieties recommended by the City Forester. The buffer area will remain and a continuous screen fence will still be in place. The second question is: What process should the City follow in reviewing the request? The project has been approved as a PUD. As such the project has to be constructed in accordance with the approved plans. The zoning code does not address amendments to approved PUD's. Does this mean that any changes to approved PUD plans have to go through the full PUD process again? This seems excessive for minor changes such as the current request. A code amendment may be in order to define what minor changes are and what kind of review process should be followed. 110