08-14-2006 CC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council June 26, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 9 1 Mayor Marty noted that the Staff report was very thorough and referred to the surrounding area 2 as being single-family residential. He said while an enhanced market value is desirable, the 3 higher density would be detrimental to the surrounding area. He said during the Planning 4 Commission public hearings, only one individual spoke in favor of the development, a Spring 5 Lake Park resident. He pointed out that based on comments at the meetings, residents’ 6 underlying concern was that development was not what was originally intended when it was 7 designate a mixed-use area, and that approval would eliminate the ability for a comprehensive 8 block-wide project. 9 10 Mayor Marty explained that a year ago when Integra first approached the City, they were unable 11 to purchase the adjoining properties. He said it is the City’s hope to develop the entire area 12 rather than taking a chunk out of the middle. He noted that in their summary, the Planning 13 Commission recommended unanimously that the Council authorize a study of the area for a 14 better use for the land. He pointed out that the Planning Commission and residents believe there 15 is a better use than the town home development. 16 17 Mayor Marty said, as stated earlier in the EDA meeting, that a feasibility study is more proactive 18 to determine what the City wants and what would fit in to the area. He said instead of being 19 reactive to certain projects, the City needs to be proactive to determine the best use for land. 20 21 Mayor Marty added that at present, he is not convinced that reducing density from 21 to 19 units 22 is a big change, regardless of the re-alignment of the units. He stated he is not convinced the 23 town home project is the best use for the area and cannot approve re-zoning. Mayor Marty said 24 the Council can override Planning Commission recommendations, but there has to be a very 25 strong argument to do so and he has not seen such to date. 26 27 Councilmember Gunn questioned what the original intent was for the area, considering it was 28 continually mentioned. Community Development Director Ericson said there is a difference of 29 opinion regarding the original intent, and there is nothing in writing specifying the exact nature 30 of the original intent. He said that some people remember it being commercially intended, others 31 believe it was to be more residential. He said the Planning Commission has taken the opinion 32 that the town home development is not what was originally intended. 33 34 Councilmember Flaherty said he is not yet ready to disregard the development. He said he wants 35 to see the proposal first. He agreed that there must be extenuating circumstances to go against 36 the recommendation of the Planning Commission, but he is not ready to dismiss it. 37 38 Councilmember Gunn said she believes the Council needs more details, planning, and exact 39 renderings before they make a decision. 40 41 Councilmember Thomas stated it would help to have a discussion about “if not this, then what.” 42 She said there is only a certain amount of detail the property owners can provide at this point and 43 if town homes are not what are desired for the area, the Council needs to decide what the original 44