Laserfiche WebLink
2 <br />Mr. Johnson asked why the city council wanted lower density. Ms. Carlson said the <br />council discussed each member’s preference for density. There is not a consensus, but the <br />council is committed to working together. The council is concerned about the economics, <br />that it works for the landowner and the city. She said Hugo was able to put together a <br />good traditional neighborhood development without Livable Communities funding. Ms. <br />Divine responded that the developer was doing a single family home project that and <br />likely didn’t pay anywhere near what the Village site is going for. The same developer <br />brought in a plan for a large tract of land he owns in Lino Lakes but became aware he <br />could not develop for some time because of the status of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff <br />talked to this developer several times about the Village project, but this developer does <br />larger single family projects. He was interested in the project, but it was too small. <br /> <br />Ms. Carlson said the lower density was in the rental apartments. Mr. Johnson noted there <br />is a huge demand for rental. Mr. Chase said the city has selected the location so now it <br />has to make it work on that site. That’s different from when a developer comes in to a city <br />with a tract of farm land with low land costs and services available and wants to develop. <br />Ms. Carlson said the council is going to start looking at cost variables for developing the <br />Village and the impact on the city. <br /> <br />Mr. Wessel said revisions will be made on the plan and then discussed with the <br />collaborative team to see if it makes economic sense. He said he also has two hotel <br />developers. Calthorpe may also review the revisions. Ideally, a master developer would <br />pick up the whole piece. The mixed use lends itself to small developers. Mr. Chase said <br />this is the best spot in the city for high density. <br /> <br />Mr. Wessel said the council asked staff to provide a clarifying letter to the Livable <br />Communities application. It says the city has not yet concluded the best method for using <br />the funding to get site control. The financial context for this project will be explored over <br />the next few months. Ms. Carlson said the city as “development lead” and a city <br />commitment to purchase property was a concern of four council members. She suggested <br />the “council is concerned” raises a red flag and perhaps it should be dropped if council <br />agrees. Mr. Johnson questioned if the Met Council committee was concerned about the <br />acquisition. Ms. Carlson said the council was concerned. Mr. Wessel said the application <br />was made general and had no commitment to acquire the land. That commitment could <br />not be made until the financial scheme was studied. <br /> <br />Mr. Wessel said the Livable Communities committee will have to find reasons to <br />eliminate applications. If Lino Lakes is eliminated it will be because we don’t have the <br />design standards or the Comprehensive Plan in place. Ms. Carlson said the council is <br />close to settling the most divisive issue regarding MUSA. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />