Minutes - 2000/04/24 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council Apri124, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 8 Planning Associate Ericson stated there is an issue in terms of whether or not the use would actually tend to depreciate the area in which it is proposed. He explained that the Church has existed in this location for 40 years, and for the most part, it has been a good neighbor to the community, however, there have been some issues with regard to the homes that are being removed, in that they have been used for temporary housing for families in need, and given that these were rental type houses, less care was given to their maintenance, upkeep and appearance. He noted that a number of residents have expressed that they are pleased that these homes would be removed. He indicated that with regard to whether or not this proposal would be too much for the area, the Comprehensive Plan designates this site as institutional, and it has been geared as such for some time. Planning Associate Ericson stated a wetland buffer permit is required by the City Code for any development within 100 feet of a wetland. He explained that the parking lot would not be within 100 feet of the wetland, however, the grading and the disturbance of the soils adjacent to the wetland during the construction of the stormwater holding pond creates the necessity for the wetland permit. He indicated the City Code provides some basis for allowing this type of buffer permit when it is for the benefit of the wetland, which in effect, this proposal is. He explained that the fact that the stormwater holding pond would be within 10 to 15 feet of the wetland would not impact the wetland, and would improve the condition of the wetland by allowing the water to drain in filtered, as opposed to unfiltered. Planning Associate Ericson stated the Planning Commission took testimony from the public and the Council has been provided with another letter from a resident. He indicated common issues related to encroachment, loss of trees, and hghhng on the site. He reiterated that the resolution before the Council stipulates that the light standards be lowered to 25 feet, and it was hoped that this would be sufficient to maintain a more residential atmosphere at this corner. He stated there would certainly be a noticeable difference at the site, however, staff does not believe this would be burdensome or detrimental to the neighboring residents. He explained that there are garages on both sides of the site, adjacent to the homes that abut the property, and the garages are located between the houses and the Church property, therefore, there is some buffer present, and a fence along the northeastern boundary would provide additional buffering. Planning Associate Ericson stated everyone is saddened at the loss of trees on the site. He explained this is a beautiful site, however, the City of Mounds View does not have any type of a tree protection ordinance or tree replacement policy. He indicated the applicant is making a good faith effort in the opinion of staff and the Planning Commission to re-landscape the site. He pointed out that no landscaping is shown on the landscape plan, in the areas where the future building additions are to be located, as this would have to be removed in three to five years with the second phase of the expansion, however, a number of trees would be added along the periphery, and as previously mentioned, approximately 90 trees would be added to this site. He reiterated it was not aone-to-one replacement and would not be comparable, however, it is expected that with an expansion of this scale, the site would be different for a number of years. He stated staff and the Planning Commission believe that over time, the site will be adequately • landscaped. Planning Associate Ericson provided the Council with a copy of the Planning Commission's resolution of approval with a number of stipulations that have been carried over to Resolution