Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Minutes of the RegJlll Council Meeting, August 10, l~ <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />CASE #87-25; (Cont'd) Moved by Hansen, seconded by Peck, that Council approve <br />Case #87-25, Amended Site Plan Review for Parking Lot <br />Expansion for 152 parking spaces, at Two Pine Tree Drive, MSI Insurance, <br />contingent upon the following: <br /> <br />a. Regrading of berms as indicated on grading plan. ~ <br />b. Relocation or replacement of all disturbed plant materials. <br />c. Placement of plant materials at the west corner of the parking lot, as <br />per plan submitted this evening. <br /> <br />Moved by Peck, seconded by Hansen, that the motion be <br />amended to include that the problem of MSI employees parking on the street <br />during construction be referred to the Ramsey County Sheriff's Office and the <br />Fire Chief for their review and recommendation. <br /> <br />In discussion, Winiecki questioned if the intent of the motion included MSI's <br />. parking and private road as well as Pine Tree Drive. Peck stated his intent was <br />for Pine Tree Drive only. <br /> <br />Council questioned if the emergency vehicle access is normally addressed in the <br />site plan review process; Planner advised that it is common to address that <br />issue during the review process and provide for the private drive to be clear <br />for emergency vehicles. <br /> <br />Moved by Peck, seconded by Hansen, that the motion be <br />amended to include as a condition, that the applicant maintain internal fire <br />lanes for emergency vehicle access. Second amendment to the motion carried. . <br />(4-0) <br /> <br />First amendment to the motion carried. (4-0) <br /> <br />Original motion as amended carried. (4-0) <br /> <br />CASE #87-27; PKING. <br />LOT EXPANSION; LAND <br />O'LAKES, LEXINGTON <br /> <br />Council was referred to Planner's report 7-20-87 and <br />Planning Commission minutes (8-5-87), recommending <br />approval of the site plan review for parking lot <br />expansion at Land O'Lakes. <br /> <br />Planner advised that the applicant is proposing to increase the parking supply <br />in the existing lot by 76 spaces; this will be accomplished by eliminating a <br />central driveway and several small "islands" in the parking lot and converting <br />the driveway to parking spaces. He noted the expansion within the existing <br />parking lot will be more functional and will have less visual impact than <br />expansion into other large landscaped areas of the site. Miller recommended <br />that the existing trees be relocated in the parking area. <br /> <br />James Strecker, representative of Land O'Lakes, was present to answer any <br />questions and stated the plan would have little impact on the current parking <br />lot situation. He advised that the existing trees are approximately 2 inches in <br />diameter and would be easily relocated in the parking area. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Moved by Winiecki, seconded by Peck, that Council <br />approve Case #87-27, Amended Site Plan for Parking Expansion, Land O'Lakes, <br />4001 Lexington Avenue, contingent upon applicant relocating existing tress in <br />the parking area. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0) <br /> <br />CASE #87-23; REZONING <br />R-l to R-4 AND PUD <br />CONCEPT PLAN. REEVES <br />SNELLING AND HWY. 96 <br /> <br />Council was referred to Planner's report dated 7-13-87, <br />and Planning Commission minutes of August 5th; relative <br />to the proposed Rezoning from R-l to R-4 and PUD <br />Concept Plan for the Reeves property at the southwest <br />quadrant of Snelling and Highway 96. <br /> <br />The Planner explained the applicants are proposing to construct a 48-unit, 3 <br />story apartment building on the 4.4-acre site. He advised this would require <br />rezoning the property from R-l to R-4; since multiple dwelling structures in <br />the R-4 District must be approved under the PUD process, approval of the PUD <br />Concept Plan is also being requested. Miller stated that the plan presented <br />this evening was almost identical to the 1985 plan Council had considered, the <br />only exception being the access had been moved to Highway 96, rather than <br />Snelling Avenue. He advised that the Public Hearing was held at the Planning <br />Commission meeting on August 5th; Planning Commission recommended approval of <br />the PUD Concept Plan only, by a split vote. Miller explained that the plan <br />submitted was not detailed sufficiently to be considered as a General Plan; <br />therefore was only considered as concept plan. When applicant submits the <br />General Plan, with detailed plans for grading, landscaping, all building <br />details; the zoning issue could be considered at that time. <br /> <br />. <br />