10-06-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission September 15, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 11 IIDevelopment Authority, the City Council and other bodies. He explained, at the point it is submitted to the Metropolitan Council, and they can be certain of what the road will be called, it can be amended appropriately. Commissioner Kaden noted the signage of I-35W had been changed to indicate that.,the road was County 10. Economic Development Coordinator Carroll stated there would probabl' :e no harm in adding the word"County" before the references to Highway 10, and if t s ani in the future it can be amended at that time. ; A. 't :' a�,,> Vis. ,.., , ,A, Commissioner Berke stated it appeared the documentpertains priml tot. ylopmet6f businesses. He inquired if there were any ideas brought forward regarding what they wo dude<= the mss:., •� �: :::;:�:: future in terms of the residential development and the deepmetf`of Mounds Vi'ess : e. Economic Development Coordinator Carroll stated this was: yt :pic of debate at the Economic Development Commission level. He stated two viewpointswe ` >rou t.forward, one was that his position, Economic Development Coordinator should deal exclusi ely with business and industry. He stated another viewpoint was that anything thatl o f t _tes to the th'&%9ItiFC3i of the community is economic development. He explained they ha:: <attemptedo strike a ance in this regard. He ov pointed out that the second and third paragraphs on <:.ge I of he do Zment contain references to residential housing. `" ,,,..„,,r Commissioner Berke stated he had no this, Weyer,vever, thetest of the document appears to address IIIbusiness, and not residential develc ent. ;::: ,. --t.,' ''''''' Commissioneaube commithe would_3 k€ r.Lto e'more mention of residential development in the secti s`t er than justsine . He noted 'a ' ncrement Financing and other funding sources were in • . . et t on for residentialdevelopment, as well as the fact that much of the property in Mounds Vie q is l r y developedy s b siness. He stated they should attempt to redevelop some of the areas, however, t ey should'cla tempt to develop the residential areas of the City. Commiss'o i r Berke co r i tthe city of Richfield appeared to be doing much in both residential and b siess areas, and ingt 'fhe City of Mounds View had similar plans, or was only going to pur - the' business development. itt .0f ,:t *mic DevelopmentCoordinator Carroll pointed out that this document was a Comprehensive ' date, and there';ire other portions of the Comprehensive Plan, which would pertain specifically Oiti :m '> e commented that former Building Inspector Steve Dorgan had done some work in : =.= d at one point, provided the Economic Development Commission members with a dra` 'oftfitIousing component of the Comprehensive Plan. Economic Development Coordinator Carroll stated it was necessary for the Economic Development Commission to determine what their work should be. He explained that in his opinion, and the opinion of a majority of the Economic Development Commission members, they exist not so much iito advise the City with regard to residential development, but primarily with the business and industry