09-06-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission September 6, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 13 Commissioner Johnson said that the property is zoned B-3 which would allow for a gas station and fast food. He stated he thinks it would be preferable to have an office building as it would generate less traffic than a fast food operation or a gas station. Chairperson Peterson said he feels the proposal solves several problems and doesn’t cause any additional problems. He agreed that cut through traffic must stop and the plan can be modified to help alleviate foot traffic and graffiti. Commissioner Stevenson indicated that the degree of the setback is his concern. He questioned whether the four-foot setback is too much or not too much. Commissioner Hegland said most of the comments have related to Tom Thumb and he believes the problems of the property not being developed have led to more problems related to Tom Thumb. However, if the property were developed, it would be less of a problem and should not increase the current problems. Commissioner Hegland said he is not sure how much variance to grant. Chairperson Peterson stated that if the Planning Commission were to apply the zoning requirement for parking lots prior to the change in late 1996 or early 1997, this request is closer to what was allowed prior to the change. Commissioner Berke indicated that this type of commercial use is perfect but he feels there is a problem with the number of parking stalls and how much setback to grant. He requested that Staff look into that issue. Commissioner Johnson said that he agrees with the variance, noting if it were 1997, the variance would have passed. Commissioner Miller said that City Code does not specify for types of parking but uses a formula that specifies a certain number of spots per square foot. Chairperson Peterson asked Planner Ericson for different types of uses and the parking requirements for them. Planner Ericson explained the requirements for parking stalls per the City Code, noting the size of the parking lot will dictate future use of the building. He also stated that an office building does not generate much traffic and a future retail use would require more parking than would be available under the current development plan. Planner Ericson asked the developer to comment on the square footage needed to make the project profitable. Chairperson Peterson commented that there would be no advantage to the developer or the City to build something that doesn’t work.