10-20-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Nordness indicated they are looking at doing whatever it takes to make it right for the City and the neighbors. He then suggested building a mound to put the fence on to provide additional height and screening with the fence. Mr. Nordness indicated that there is a lot of light on O’Connell from across the street and they intend to have lower light levels than that. Mr. Nordness said it is important to him to work with clients who do what they say they will do and this company will do so. Aaron Backman, Mounds View Economic Development Coordinator, explained that the challenge with Hardee’s is there is split ownership with the building being owned by one party and the property by another and the two rarely agree. He then told the Commission and residents that this company is willing to invest $1.2 million into the community and toward the tax base. Dan Murr of 5279 O’Connell Drive pointed out that they were proposing making a mound or increasing a buffer along O’Connell but that is not possible with the plan as shown because it shows a drainage ditch for the parking lot. Chair Stevenson indicated this is just the first concept and there is time for further amendments to the plan should it move past this stage. Mr. Murr said he understood that but feels that his comment speaks directly to the lot size in that there is not enough room on the lot to do all that they are saying they will do with screening and accommodating runoff. Commissioner Scotch said that residents tell her that there are too many gas stations, too many pharmacies and then joke about adding car lots. She then said that she appreciates the hard work of Staff to bring development to the City but she does not feel that a car lot is the right answer for this location. Chair Stevenson commented that the Resolution is for denial and asked why Staff had not prepared a Resolution for approval. Planner Prososki indicated that, at the time she wrote the report, she could not come up with a hardship. She then said that, if the Commission feels the variance can be justified with hardship, Staff would need direction as to what the hardship would be so that a Resolution of approval could be drafted. Chair Stevenson indicated that he does not see that the hardship requirements have been met. Commissioner Miller indicated the Commission needs to uphold the law and, there are certain hardship criteria that need to be met and they are not with this request.