Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission July 16, 1997 . <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> Chair Peterson opened the floor for discussion on Resolution 514-97, the Silver Lake <br /> Commons Development Review. <br /> L.W. Stigney stated his agreement with Commissioner Obert's opposition* he proposed <br /> development. Stigney suggested that the City should slow do `,,:. tep h ,`•"and see what <br /> other development options are available for the site. } • ;f <br /> 1 1, k• a. <br /> Commissioner Obert said that putting subsidized sing on t. � ° kT ~ y0 corridor, <br /> the City's commercial show case, doesn't match his visi how h y, O shad <br /> aw <br /> be developed. �, „}, „� ;;, "��.�.. i <br /> Mike Coon, 7851 Eastwood, stated that he woul}d �, e e a walk-in medical clinic built <br /> r <br /> on the site. He also stated his opposition to low �'` .,• <br /> AP <br /> Pinkerton stated that he thought the City h 1dpe a good `NmaRtik`,',`•' arching the <br /> development. There was aprofessional. �.* s ' a:zx ` <br /> p z hireciCity to give its <br /> recommendation on how best to uses: ` ' rro ` •d multiple;-?mily housing is the <br /> recommendation that came back fr•he co, } ' ••:.: ,,,,•t• t� kerton also stated that the <br /> property is zoned R-3 and R-4. V • .•e zonin would units and Pinkerton <br /> reminded the Commission th �ee develo' hent is*only 16 units. Ili <br /> Director Sheldon briefly:; ewed fes" e Co„ Psion and public the study that was done <br /> by Sµ� Consultants•.: ,.- Towle.` < :; • sj 5` oup. The Highway 10 Area Study stated <br /> th amily r.;::,\-0' `"z _ was the-y'-- Z=``or the property. <br /> :.. :,f <br /> lalt <br /> Milo::`:;. <br /> `�'0Aked hor r f; :- property was marketed for before the study was done. <br /> Directz €1 : };`�• - pond } _: she would get the information from the Economic <br /> Dei �opmeritt)j •:, d would let him know. <br /> }Chair Peterson`� ta •ut in his opinion the City was not forced into this project. In the <br /> early '90s it wasdetermined by the City that the property would remain R-3 because of the <br /> «i t neighborhood goosition to any commercial business being developed in the area. <br /> gliw`.m.: mm er Miller stated that the owner of the property is responsible for the decision <br /> "`"'` 51T '"develop the property. She added that she liked the idea that MSP has hired a <br /> .:+.}}:,iii„}"�.• <br /> '`_�� , i 'sional management company to manage the rental aspect of the proposed Silver <br /> Lake Commons project. <br /> Commissioner Brasaemle stated that the rationale for approval or denial of the project is <br /> • <br /> 6 <br />