09-01-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission August 18, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 4 terms of the lack of visibilitydue to its close proximityto the intersection with CountyRoad I. He. • stated staff recommended the site plan be revised to provide an exit only onto County Road I, as previously discussed. He stated that this revision to the site plan might also result in additional parking spaces. Ericson stated the present site plan indicates a total of twenty-six parking stalls, which translates to slightly more than one stall for every two beds. He stated the City Code requires four stalls plus one stall per every three beds, which translates to 22 stalls for they roposed facility. He stated it was possible that additional parking spaces could be provide :nd be indicated<s roof of parki on the site plan, if necessary. He explained, however, a mere intenset`i'ri t ;-rp:arking is .: s could be addressed and duringthe Development Review'p ocess. '` ' Ericson stated the applicant had obtained a letter of permisSMOulithe owners of Silver View Plaza, indicating they would allow overflow parking onto their parking parld.:0061Wstated, upon providing a 48- hour notice, the applicant would be allowed to utilize.,,t 'e` :of their parking lot, when necessary. He stated this was a vital component tO\-1-esolvitilipAtong issues during past discussions. He provided the Commission with a letter f m resident < concerns that the parkingbe ade::� at`e, int cause a '-f erflow parkingonto the expressed their .:�,::»::::<::,�::��;:::.>>.:<� <<<;«:� � : surrounding residential areas. He stated he belie ed these' er:;s yv cre: liared by all those involved. Age wilf init Ericson stated Section 3 of the proposedzoning ordinance inditf ''malo The Mounds View City Council does hereby stipulate that in the event l development being.proposed by MSP Real Estate does not • come to fruition, within one year csordinge's adoption (or sooner, upon written notification of the applicant), the Council will9t to reinseythetperty 's original B-2 zoning classification." He stated the„City Attorney» :ad ndicated p `l like the opportunity to review this section to ensure it do not force t14.011ncilthe to talk xn:; ction that it may not wish to. Ericson explained this sec`' ”'eta' remain„i ' Y`+ rance tentatively, or be amended in a manner which does not force the Council;; "take actio01010:404,ins the intent of the language. He stated the City Attorney would review this': u ge to bet"is in proper legal form. Ericson st. the condi t :;forth in the City Code and Zoning Code for this type of use are all addres. :rand met satisf .k'il He stated if the Commission desired to include further conditions g the operation oftheff cility, they could be addressed at this time, and forwarded to the City C A _.Chair Miller4; ened the floor for public input. WatiVANWiiinz >40e.410 94*"```Stigney inquired if there would be any walking access provided for those people utilr4i . : : 'sverflow parking at the adjacent shopping center. Ericson stated he was uncertain, and inquired if there was a sidewalk along that side of Mounds View Drive. Commissioner Laube stated that there was not. He stated this question had come forward during a previous meeting, in terms of whether or not a sidewalk would be constructed around the building along Mounds View Drive and in the driveway for the residents who might wish to walk around the building.