Laserfiche WebLink
• Mounds View Planning Commission April 2, 1997 <br /> Special Agenda Meeting Page 7 <br /> between your Comp Plan and your zoning. The zoning could be changed to <br /> accommodate the project and it would still not match the Comp Plan. She is not, <br /> however, advising that be done. She expressed that she thought the;, .•mp Plan <br /> that now indicates residential is different enough from the e;:•: ,in >x: <br /> 9 9 proposed <br /> zoning, and that we should finally make a decision regardi �i�;:�. ',�.:�•�•the Comp Plan <br /> should say. Commissioner Obert asked if the; ommiss seeded with the ' <br /> .=Y �•K�1tiZ:::Y w <br /> applicant's PUD proposal, would it then be do Director,, r icated that" <br /> the property would no longer be vacant and Id not be bat :�YrA adctsU <br /> that the state law states that zoning takes p +:,„,,,dent• er comp pl' & y <br /> are different. She commented that it would �1, Y: to Staff if theyut on <br /> whether or not the Commission felt that there�` e room on this parcel for <br /> commercial activity. The Planning Commissicggat the Comp Plan should <br /> be changed and that rezoning to a PUD co :d`be usl € ` tool to control and limit <br /> negative impact for the property. ,:, ..� = xk«z=w{ . <br /> The Commission brieflydiscusse `'••"Y` <br /> d:€ ���e' `' .•nalizati.�r�and to align Edgewood <br /> Drive with the site. The Planning<:Commis td < € Oposed to this. Mr. Smith <br /> Y;`• � ..wY`Y <br /> asked that the Planning Commission make a decoron their propsal prior to <br /> • receiving a decision from M I DT. C.«imissiok 'r Brasaemle requested that they <br /> receive some assurance MnD that if t<• proposal went through, the City <br /> would continue workinget the,; `nal pu L ` Mr. Smith brought up the resolution <br /> YYh �:YtY::.: L22Y` <br /> from DC remindir ;tommiss .,; EDC recommended approval of the <br /> prx `Y"`•: Howeve ,� anted tIt work with the Developer to seek a signal <br /> 'Yy`x4\.t'::•L,`,.:..t.:.\ :,#...:.Y. 2YY:`Y``..:'`i`.Y <br /> Isooks <br /> Parkingg% asemens :soaping and the buffer between the residents on <br /> County aoa < Y ere brn 'I iscussed. Mr. Emster expressed some of the <br /> co. . S b ` nts ort County Road H2 about screening, the overall <br /> ; nascapirrg;aVearance of�pro-ppsed-fence: He commented that the <br /> .LzYr: ,.YYYY,r.YYY: <br /> e,�4�residents wante' yep property values as high as possible. Mr. Smith replied <br /> ` that he City wok cdntrol the fence design during the development stage. <br /> Iii. CommissioneBrasaemle added that the residents would have an opportunity to <br /> irY:'. <br /> A`:M.Y•b comment at.:0 Development stage. Director Sheldon advised the Planning <br /> YY;;;;}}} Y.commi§, hat they could defer the landscaping issue and meet with the <br /> ;YYr' ItYY ` '� :ood to come up with the most acceptable combination. <br /> A resident inquired if the homes along County Road H2 that were purchased by Jay <br /> Anthony would be rezoned. The Commission responded that they would remain <br /> residential. <br /> • <br />