Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission March 7, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 3 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />mentioned a turn lane on Highway 10 indicating it may be possible to use part of the shoulder to <br />incorporate the turn lane. <br /> <br />Director Ericson explained the only accessory structure on the property would be the trash <br />enclosure located behind the building. <br /> <br />Director Ericson noted the drainage plan has been reviewed and approved by the public works <br />department. He also noted the site will provide less runoff to the storm water management pond <br />than originally estimated and stated there will need to be a drainage swale between Mr. <br />Winiecki’s property and the proposed building. <br /> <br />Director Ericson noted that rather than requiring the developer to build trailways and provide <br />decorative lighting it may be more appropriate to escrow a certain dollar amount to allow the <br />City to build the trailway after the Highway 10 redevelopment plan is developed. Staff estimates <br />the amount of the improvement dedication would be $14,125.00. <br /> <br />Director Ericson noted Minnesota Institute for Public Health intended to relocate the sign from <br />its Anoka location to the site and that the sign is 32 square feet and internally illuminated. The <br />sign will be set on a masonry base with materials that match the building. <br /> <br />Director Ericson noted there is a Resolution for consideration if the Commission chooses to do <br />so. <br /> <br />Mr. George Winiecki of 2704 N.E. Highway 10 addressed the Commission and apologized for <br />not being able to attend the previous meeting concerning this issue. He then gave a brief history <br />of how he arrived at his current business location noting he owned the corner lot that was the key <br />piece in the Silverview Estates PUD planning process. Mr. Winiecki then made his point to the <br />Commission, which is that his business would be negatively impacted if the proposed building is <br />not setback even with his building. Mr. Winiecki told the Commission that he felt that he gave <br />up location when he sold the corner lot which allowed the Silverview Estates PUD to go forward <br />but made up for losing location with curb appeal as the building he moved into is a very nice <br />building. <br /> <br />Mr. Winiecki noted the City had led him to believe the only way to develop the lot he owned was <br />through a PUD and so he agreed to the deal to make it work. He explained to the Commission <br />his one concern and request during the Silverview Estates PUD planning process was for the <br />location of the building that would someday be built on the lot in question. He then explained to <br />the Commission that he thought he had an agreement with the City on the matter. <br /> <br />Mr. Winiecki noted he would like the Commission to tell the developer there is a concept plan <br />that is good and require them to follow it. He then stated he feels betrayed on this issue as the <br />other people involved in the transaction have gotten what they wanted and he has not. <br /> <br />Mr. Winiecki provided copies of the Spring Lake Park, New Brighton, Arden Hills and <br />Shoreview zoning codes as well as Mounds View’s code to show that his request to require the