Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission January 17, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br /> <br /> <br />4. Approval of Minutes <br /> <br />A. December 20, 2000 <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Kaden. To approve the December 20, 2000 Meeting <br />Minutes as presented. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 6 Nays - 0 Motion carried. <br /> <br /> <br />5. Planning Case No. DE00-002 <br />Property Involved: 7664 Greenfield Avenue <br />Review and Discuss Site Plans for a 3,500 Square-Foot Office Building, <br />Consideration of Resolution 646-01, a Resolution Recommending City <br />Council Approval. <br />Applicant: Tony Mezzenga <br /> <br />Community Development Director Ericson explained this is a request for approval of a <br />development review to construct an office building with approximately 2,000 square feet <br />of office space. This matter was before the Planning Commission on January 3, 2001 for <br />review. <br /> <br />Staff spoke to the applicant, Mr. Mezzenga, prior to the meeting on January 3, 2001 <br />concerning several issues the City needed clarified or changed. Mr. Mezzenga agreed to <br />the changes and has submitted amended plans that are before the Commission for <br />approval. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Ericson noted there were still a few issues that needed <br />to be addressed by the Planning Commission before it would consider a recommendation <br />to Council, such as the direction of storm water runoff indicated on the site plan with <br />arrows, the landscaping areas shown and the schedule of plantings to be used, and the <br />identification of the screening and fencing to be utilized. The landscape plan shall be <br />reviewed by the City Forester. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated that he did not believe signage to be an issue provided it meets <br />city code requirements. He stated he had spoken to Mr. Mezzenga and notified him the <br />City would require a monument type sign rather than a pole type sign due to the building <br />being located in a residential neighborhood. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson inquired as to what the setback for the parking lot to County <br />Road I was. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Ericson indicated the setback was originally shown to <br />be 26 feet, but was revised to show a 13-foot setback. <br />