Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission July 5, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 6 <br /> <br /> <br />parking lot, and the existing volume of the pond. It would also take on much of the storm water <br />that is running through the existing storm sewer on Edgewood Drive, which currently flows <br />untreated under Highway 10. The intent is to take stormwater off Edgewood Drive and get it <br />filtered and cleansed before sending it back into the system. The pond would be sized to utilize <br />the uplands that are available, not 100% of the volume. He stated he thinks this is a great benefit <br />to the City, that they can look at ponding from a more regional perspective, rather than on a <br />single development scenario. It should reduce the possibility of downstream flooding and will <br />be a water quality benefit for the City as well. <br /> <br />Planner Ericson advised the preliminary plat in the staff report indicated the plat would be named <br />Mounds View City Hall Addition. There are no changes to the plat, and copies will be made <br />available at the next meeting. The easement area for the sign was discussed concerning rights to <br />the sign easement area where the Bel Rae ballroom sign was. When the City purchased the Bel <br />Rae ballroom and constructed the Community Center they also took over ownership of that <br />easement area. He explained it is likely the City would vacate that easement area and if there is a <br />need to create another area for signage purposes they could address that issue on its own at some <br />point in the future, rather than trying to retain some portion of the existing easement area to meet <br />the needs of the second developable lot. A vacation of the original Edgewood Drive right of way <br />would also be required and is shown on the plat as being vacated. The wetland area would be <br />covered by an easement, something that Rice Creek Watershed District would require, and given <br />that it would become the City’s property he does not think there would be an issue with <br />dedicating an easement. If the City is the deed holder, an easement may not even be required. <br /> <br />Planner Ericson reported the Rice Creek Watershed District has reviewed the plans and because <br />of the improvement to the water quality and additional ponding and storm water capacity they <br />are very excited about this plan. They have indicated that as soon as the final specifications are <br />forwarded to them it should be approved. <br /> <br />Planner Ericson advised the developer is proposing 146 parking spaces. The City Code requires <br />a little more than that, however, there is a benefit of having both uses side by side. There would <br />be a cross access in parking easement granted so that in times of peak use patrons from either <br />parcel could use the other’s parking. Staff felt that would compensate for the deficiency in <br />parking. One of the intents of the Planned Unit Development process is that they look at these <br />issues and determine if there are creative ways to address specific requirements, such as parking <br />and setbacks in ways that are not normally handled by the zoning code. The Planned Unit <br />Development process allows the City to deal with them in a more creative and beneficial way <br />that would allow for development to occur in an area where it might otherwise not occur. <br /> <br />Planner Ericson indicated that staff had contracted with a commercial appraiser to appraise both <br />the City’s remnant parcel and also on the eight acres that would be transferred to the City. He <br />noted that Staff had handed out a copy of the summary page which shows the valuations on the <br />land. The appraisal indicates that the City’s parcel has a $166,000 value while the eight acres of <br />Midland Videen property is valued at $161,000. It is very similar in terms of value, which is <br />presuming that it could be developed as a stand-alone parcel. If the two parcels were joined <br />together and appraised, the value of the two parcels combined would be more than their parts. <br />