09-12-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View EDA September 12, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 3 representing a Mounds View resident and conducting a market analysis. Then she discovered that Mounds View may be interested in developing the area so she approached Cheryl Stinski, who is a developer, to see if she would be interested. Ms. Hart stated they talked to the residents and presented the Council with a copy of those findings. She stated they felt the best way to approach residents was with a letter and then a visit or telephone call. They were able to sit down with a few residents and, for the most part, communication has been over the telephone. So far they have talked to everyone at least once and a few several times. Five property owners favor selling right now, two favor the development but are not interested in selling their home, two answered a definite “no” to the development, and two were not committed. Ms. Hart advised that the two who are in definite favor of selling are David Little and James Lund. Both have indicated an interest in attending a Council meeting to express their support. She explained that Mr. Lund is located south of Laport Meadows and is not part of the initial project but could be if the Council wanted to consider that boundary of the development. Mr. Lund is very interested in selling and will also attend a meeting to voice his support to include his property in the Laport Meadows development. Jeff Sweitzert, Shared Design, stated he has prepared two diagrams that include several schemes. Scheme A has a senior facility in the compost location and beneath that 24 single family units on individual properties. The concept for seniors has two buildings that favor the water areas, just north of the buildings with a turnaround drop off area. The single family area would have an alley to access garages at the back of the house with a pedestrian street going directly out to the wetland area. This will make the wetland accessible to more than just the Laport Meadows residents since it would be a non-vehicular roadway. There would also be several shelters with docks into the wetland to allow people to sun, fish, or bird watch. The park would have a meandering pathway along the buffer treed area on the south perimeter of Highway 10. That would also provide noise abatement and bring pedestrians to a gathering point at the senior housing and terminating in a picnic park at the north end. Mr. Sweitzert presented Scheme B that contained 24 single family homes in a design that incorporates three streets but no alleys. The sites would have a larger back yard and four larger single family homes would be sited to the south of the wetland. The wetland would have a park and meandering pathway. The senior housing would be contained in three buildings in the compost area with an amphitheater and terminating in a picnic area at the far north area. This is a more traditional concept. Mr. Sweitzert then displayed an overlay that depicted existing conditions and how it is effective with their concepts. He noted that the existing conditions work best with Scheme A, which is their favored design. He also noted the location of existing structures and conditions that are not part of the proposed development. Commissioner Thomas stated the immediate question that comes to mind from the survey is the owners on Long Lake Road who are not interested in selling and how that would figure in. She