My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1998/05/26
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
Agenda Packets - 1998/05/26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:48:07 PM
Creation date
6/18/2018 6:25:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
5/26/1998
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
5/26/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
93
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
APPROVED <br /> Page 8 <br /> April 27, 1998 <br /> Mounds View City Council <br /> David Jahnke, 8428 Eastwood Road,stated he is concerned about the residents on Greenwood due to the <br /> traffic,but he feels residents need to consider the number of businesses that have been lost to other <br /> communities. People need to start thinking about the tax base. Where should commercial businesses <br /> locate? He feels this area is more appropriate for business than for residential as there are safety concerns <br /> with regard to children and Highway 10. <br /> JoAnn Colleen,2617 County Road I,stated her property is immediately East of the proposed Wallgreens <br /> site. Highway 10 has been designated as the main corridor where businesses and development need to <br /> locate. At some point,residences will be affected by development on Highway 10. Wallgreens will be <br /> paying a considerable amount more in taxes than what the was being paid by the four residences on that <br /> site. Ms. Colleen stated she is in support of the proposed development. She noted,however that there are <br /> different options for routing traffic and it is important for the City to look at those options if the <br /> development is to proceed. <br /> Lance King,7751 Greenwood Drive,stated he was out of town and therefore did not have the opportunity <br /> to sign the petition in opposition to the development. He noted that he did not receive a notice of the <br /> Public Hearing. To the public,it appears that the Council has already made a decision on this issue. He <br /> stated he finds it difficult to believe that Wallgreens would choose to locate in an area where fast food <br /> restaurants are struggling,where there are a number of vacant lease spaces available and where a <br /> Wallgreens is located within less than 3 miles. <br /> Jim Schmidt,5446 Erickson Road,stated he feels there are other,more appropriate areas in the community <br /> for a Wallgreens store and is alarmed that the Council would consider removing four residential homes to <br /> make way for a commercial development. Without access to Highway 10,traffic will have a substantial <br /> impact on the residents in the neighborhood. <br /> Steve Pansen,7721 Greenwood Drive,stated he is disappointed that this development has moved forward <br /> without the public receiving more information. He feels the development will have an impact on the <br /> safety of the children in the neighborhood. <br /> Gayla Keyer,7730 Greenwood Drive,stated she has worked actively on this issue for the past six months. <br /> Unfortunately,she did not have much support and she eventually she sold out. She stated she is happy to <br /> see the residents back together. She feels,however,that the developer has essentially destroyed the <br /> neighborhood. <br /> Terri Smith,2653 Scottland Court,wondered when her home would be affected. She feels it is unfair that <br /> homes are being taken away. <br /> Bob Glazer,2625 Hillview Road,asked why Mounds View needs this development. <br /> Gerald Arel,7750 Greenwood Drive,stated he opposes the proposed change to the comprehensive plan <br /> and the re-zoning of the property. He stated residents were offered money in exchange for silencing their <br /> voices. He stated he is not against Wallgreens,but is against what is being done in regard to amendments <br /> to the comprehensive plan. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.