My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-19-2003
MoundsView
>
City Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
02-19-2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/4/2018 7:26:23 AM
Creation date
9/4/2018 6:35:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/19/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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).
View images
View plain text
Mounds View Planning Commission January 22, 2003 <br />Regular Meeting Page 3 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller asked if the original variance was for the number of stalls. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated the variance was for the setback. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller asked why there was not a development agreement originally. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated he was not sure why a development agreement was not required but <br />said, in retrospect, one should have been done but they typically were not done for smaller <br />developments and this development was perceived as a small development. He then indicated <br />that all commercial developments now require a development agreement. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zwirn asked why the address for the building is 2402 County Road I when it <br />faces Greenfield. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated the property owner requested the County Road I address and is <br />allowed to do so as the property is on the corner of Greenfield and County Road I. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson said he feels there should be a number of feet listed in the resolution to make it <br />clear for Council that the Commission was considering 75 feet or just north of the apartments. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated that Staff would need to establish a reference point for where the 75 <br />feet begins. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller indicated she thought the Officer referenced 75 feet back from County <br />Road I. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated that parking is not allowed 30 feet back from the intersection already. <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch expressed concern that posting no parking to 75 feet would just push the <br />parking farther down the block. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson indicated he would rather see the parking stalls added and approval of a <br />two-foot variance before restricting parking but, if the issue is not resolved, he is not against <br />posting the whole east side of Greenfield no parking. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller said she did not think it would be fair to the residents to mark the whole <br />street no parking. <br /> <br />Director Ericson clarified that the City does not have the power to force the property owner to <br />apply for the variance and expand the parking lot. He then said that posting the street no parking <br />would force the property owner to work to resolve the parking issue by applying for the variance <br />to expand the parking lot. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.