Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />MARCH 9, 1994 <br />considerinq this development proposal. DeLonais <br />pointed out the Planner's report on this matter, <br />feeling that it was very good and detailed a lot of the <br />issues to be considered. DeLonais pointed out that a <br />single-family home development could result in a lot of <br />individual driveways coming out onto Vadnais Blvd. <br />There is less hard surface proposed under the R-2 <br />development, and less vegetation being disturbed. <br />DeLonais pointed out that the City has more opportunity <br />to control the development under the R-2 concept. <br />DeLonais indicated that the Planning Commission voted 7 <br />to 0 in support of the rezoning concept and townhome <br />development concept. DeLonais stated that he has not <br />heard any reasons to not support the recommendation of <br />the Planninq Commission. <br />DeLonais pointed out that the density proposed with R-2 <br />is not much greater than what would be allowed under R- <br />1. An R-2 development requires very little maintenance <br />on the part of the City, pointing out that only sewer <br />maintenance and emergency services would need to be <br />provided. DeLonais stated that he has not seen as <br />reputable a developer as Pratt Homes. <br />Steve Martin, resident of the area, reported that a <br />neighborhood meeting was held and the majority of the <br />property owners opposed the R-2 development. Martin <br />pointed out that a homeowner's association could be <br />formed to govern the single-family development. Martin <br />asked if the City could send a message to Vadnais <br />xeights encouraging them to forego the public access. <br />Martin pointed out that only 300 feet of lake frontage <br />lies in Vadnais Iieights, and the remainder in Little <br />Canada. <br />Todd Sommer, 285 Twin Lake Trail, reported that at the <br />Vadnais Heights City Council meeting last week, the <br />City did not have a good idea of what it was going to <br />do with regard to development of the Mitchell property <br />in Vadnais Heights. Plans A, B, and C were presented. <br />There appears to be a difference of opinion between the <br />Vadnais Heights Park Commission and Park Department on <br />the park issue. The matter was tabled by the Council. <br />Sommer reported that Little Canada residents petitioned <br />Vadnais Heights about environmental concerns, and the <br />8 <br />