Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission September 3, 2008 <br />Regular Meeting Page 3 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />facilities and the addition of an arcade. The main issue with these planning requests is parking and <br />would there be enough. She stated the developer submitted a parking study for the site and this <br />information was included in the Planning Commissioners’ packet. She stated the 2000 PUD <br />Agreement required 808 parking stalls and currently the Mermaid only has 760 parking stalls. She <br />stated staff felt the new retail would have somewhat different hours of business compared to the <br />Mermaid so the proposed shared parking should not be an issue. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stated the parking requirements are an issue but it should not determine if the <br />PUD would be approved and would be reviewed in the development process. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Heller indicated the parking study and discussed the sharing of parking <br />between the uses, but there would still be a loss of 106 parking stalls. She added parking <br />requirements are based solely on the square footage of the buildings and doesn’t take into <br />account the overlapping of uses or different business needs and hours on the site. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller stated she was concerned about traffic off of County Highway 10. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Heller felt the current accesses to the Mermaid would be adequate. She <br />indicated the County Highway 10 and County Road H intersection is anticipated to be rebuilt <br />within the next year or two. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cramblit asked if it was part of the TCAAP restructure. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Heller stated she believed so and had heard that it could happen as early as <br />2009. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Roberts stated he anticipates the parking issue would work <br />itself out because it is in the best interest of the business owners to make it work. If suddenly <br />there isn’t enough parking it would over flow into adjoining businesses. He felt the retail center <br />would not need more than 40 to 50 parking spaces at one time and the zoning code can not <br />address all of the different business and parking scenarios. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson indicated parking needs may depend on which types of businesses come into the <br />retail area. He added he was impressed with the parking study that was performed and the <br />results. <br /> <br />Commissioner Meehlhause stated the Mermaid’s parking lots always seem like they are not <br />being used as much as they could be. He also expressed concern about where the park and ride <br />would be relocated. <br /> <br />Dan Hall, owner of the Mermaid, stated the park and ride can go anywhere on the site. <br />Currently, it has 40 to 50 cars and uses a portion of the proposed development area. He stated <br />there is also the cross parking agreement with Abbey Carpet. He stated he has researched many <br />other area establishments similar to the Mermaid and their parking amounts is considerably less <br />than what they have.