Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission September 4, 2002 <br />Regular Meeting Page 3 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson asked that Number 3 and Number 4 from the Resolution be read. He then said <br />that he liked the way the Resolution was worded. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson read Number 3 and Number 4 from the Resolution and they are as follows: <br /> <br />3. The minimum land area required for a PUD is three (3) acres. The subject <br />properties total approximately 2.3 acres. <br /> <br />4. The surrounding area located along Highway 10 between Groveland Road and <br />Fairchild Avenue are also designated as PUD on the Future Land Use Map. <br />Without the subject properties, the remaining area to the west and the area to the <br />east would not consist of the minimum area required of three (3) acres for the <br />PUD designation, thus preventing these areas from being rezoned to PUD in the <br />future. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Song. To Approve Resolution 706-02, a Resolution <br />Recommending Denial of a Request to Rezone the Property Located at 2925 County Highway 10 <br />from R-1, Single Family Residential, to R-3, Medium Density Residential and the Property <br />Located at 2901 County Highway 10 from B-3, Highway Business, to R-3, Medium Density <br />Residential. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson abstained from voting. <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />6. Planning Case DE02-006 <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated this case was a request for development review for a new commercial <br />building along Highway 10 on the old Perkins site. He then indicated the requirements for a <br />development review were outlined in the Staff report. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that parking is one of the biggest issues on the site plan. He then <br />indicated the applicant had calculated the total number of spaces required to be 74 but the City’s <br />Code actually requires 94 spaces. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson suggested overcoming this parking shortage by showing four more spaces in <br />the Mermaid lot with the joint facilities parking agreement. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson explained that a conditional use permit is required because joint facilities <br />parking cannot be used to meet the City’s Code without a conditional use permit. <br /> <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that there is a provision in the code to allow an applicant to show <br />15% of the required parking as proof of parking that does not have to be constructed <br />immediately.