My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-21-2006
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
06-21-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/30/2018 10:09:03 AM
Creation date
8/30/2018 10:07:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
6/21/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
145
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
identifies the O’Neil property PUD site as a Regional Commercial PUD. The proposed <br />phical area involved <br />accessory building as an addition to the existing office building would be consistent with the <br />Comp Plan. <br /> <br />2. The geogra . The parcel is a triangle shape lot bordered by County Road <br />0 and Long Lake Road on two sides, and to the south, a wooded wetland area separates the 1 <br />movie theater and Subway mall from this building. Rice Creek Watershed District approved the <br />inititial development and stormwater ponds were constructed to handle full site build out, which <br />includes the subject parcel. <br /> <br />3. Neighborhood Impact. The neighborhood would not be impacted by adding a garage to the <br />ffice building. At this time, the plan is that only one business would lease the entire building so <br />rounding area <br />o <br />traffic would be minimum. <br /> <br />4. The character of the sur . The proposed attached garage may not be out of <br />lace as the design would blend in with the current structure, even though it is typically not p <br />common for office or commercial buildings to have garages. <br /> <br />5. The demonstrated need for such use. LandCor has finally found a tenant that would lease <br />e entire building but they require garage space. Since the PUD also states that parking on the <br />ssory building would have no adverse <br />pacts and would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff supports the <br />ecommendation: <br /> <br />ission may take one of the following actions related to the PUD <br />mendment request: <br />Amendment as requested. Resolution 840-06 is attached for your <br />consideration if you should choose this option. <br />2. Commission will need to direct staff to <br />prepare a resolution with findings of fact to support the denial recommendation. <br />3. nning <br />Commission should need additional information or more input before a decision can be <br /> <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />th <br />site is only allowed during business hours, any tenant that had company vehicles would not be <br />able to leave them outside at the building overnight. <br /> <br />It appears that amending the PUD to allow for an acce <br />im <br />amendment to allow for one attached garage on the site. <br /> <br /> <br />R <br />The Planning Comm <br />A <br /> <br />1. Approve the PUD <br /> <br />Deny the request. To consider this option, the <br /> <br />Table action on the request. This option would be appropriate if the Pla <br />made. <br /> <br />Heidi Heller <br />Planning Associate <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.