Laserfiche WebLink
APPR cRiED <br /> Page 4 . <br /> May 12, 1997 <br /> Mounds View City Council <br /> Ms. Sheldon proceeded to summarize the proposed project She noted those items which staff took into <br /> consideration when preparing the amendment request as well as how any items of concern were addressed. <br /> Ms. Sheldon noted a correction to Page 7 of Resolution No.5104. The third line of Paragraph 3 should be <br /> changed to read"Lower intensity uses would include single-family housing(up to three units per acre), <br /> and office uses." <br /> Attorney Bob Long noted that this Resolution would require a 2/3 vote,therefore it would require approval <br /> from at least four of the five council members. <br /> Ms. Sheldon noted that changing the Comprehensive Plan does not approve the proposed project However, <br /> the project will not be able to move forward at all without the amendment to the Comp.Plan. <br /> The Planning Commission voted 6-0 in favor of the Comp Plan Amendment <br /> Ms.Sheldon noted that consideration criteria for rezoning includes whether or not the rezoning is consistent <br /> with the Comprehensive Plan(this would be if the Council approved the amendment to the Comprehensive <br /> Plan),whether or not it fits with the surrounding area,and if there is a demonstrated need for the use. She <br /> noted that the developer has met with residents in the neighborhood to try to determine what adjustments <br /> needed to be made to the plan to provide the best buffer they could between the development and the existing <br /> neighborhood. In regard to the demonstrated need for the use,the applicant provided a market study indicating411, <br /> the surrounding theaters in radiuses of 3,5 and seven miles. <br /> Ms. Sheldon proceeded to provide a summary of the concerns raised by residents in the discussion of the <br /> project These included wetland and wetland buffer,drainage,soils,vegetation and landscaping,traffic,access, <br /> parking,market demand,economic benefits,public safety, impact on schools,etc. <br /> Ms. Charleen Zimmer,of SRF Consulting Group,was present and discussed the specifics of the traffic analysis <br /> they conducted for the proposed development The report they prepared also included estimates of traffic <br /> generated by five other land use scenarios for the site. The applicant,the Police Chief and the <br /> neighborhood would like to see a full movement intersection at the access point off Highway 10,and SRF and <br /> staff would like to proceed working with MNDOT on this issue,but would like to get Council's feelings on the <br /> project before pursuing this. <br /> Council member Trude wondered if the applicant would be open to sharing the costs of putting in a controlled <br /> intersection to help defray the costs. Ms.Sheldon stated this would need to discussed with the applicant <br /> Council member Stigney stated he would be uncomfortable going ahead on the project without the controlled <br /> intersection. Other options were discussed for the intersection in the event that MNDOT <br /> would not approve control signals. Council member Trude noted that the Community Center could <br /> significantly affect the traffic in the area,especially at times of Volleyball tournaments,etc. Discussion also <br /> followed in regard to the possible need for emergency vehicle controls at the intersection. <br /> Council member Stigney asked if any thought has been given to under grounding the overhead power lines <br /> during the redevelopment of the area. Ms. Sheldon stated if overhead power lines are on the proposed site, <br /> they would need to underground them. If they are in the public right of way,it may be necessary for the city to • <br /> examine whether some type of cooperative project could be done in conjunction with this. This could be <br /> something that TIF funds could be used for. <br />