My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2002/08/12
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
Agenda Packets - 2002/08/12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:49:32 PM
Creation date
8/15/2018 1:05:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
8/12/2002
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
8/12/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
136
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council July 8, 2002 <br />Regular Meeting Page 17 <br /> <br />because the homes are small people would buy them as investments and rent them out. He also <br />asked what the likelihood of doing the development as a PUD would be. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated it could be done as a PUD but the property owner would need to <br />agree. He then said that the City would retain ultimate control over the development through the <br />site review process should the approval of the rezoning move forward. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas said that on behalf of renters, just because a home is owned by <br />somebody and rented does not make it a bad thing. She then said that the Council is really <br />determining whether the rezoning would move forward not discussing the platting. <br /> <br />Council Member Quick asked at what point in time the public hearing would be closed to bring <br />the matter to Council for discussion. <br /> <br />Mr. Sprunck asked if anybody could give him one good defensible reason as to why population <br />density and traffic density should be increased in the area. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre asked him why it should not be since the traffic capacity is there with the <br />improvement to H2. <br /> <br />Steve Miller asked if it would be possible to rezone the lots to R-2 rather than R-3. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated the Planning Commission had asked that Staff discuss that with Mr. <br />Harstad and it is not an option because the request is for R-3. He then said that Council could <br />deny the rezone and suggest that R-2 may be more appropriate. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas commented that the rights of the property owner to develop his land <br />needed to be respected as much as the rights of the residents in the area. She then said that, if <br />there is no significant reason not to increase the density, then why should the City not do so. <br /> <br />Ron Morgan indicated that the Planning Commission spent two evenings discussing this matter <br />and, without exception, voted this down. He then said he has heard no one other than Harstad <br />speak to the benefits of this development. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre closed the public hearing at 9:24 p.m. and thanked residents for their input. <br /> <br />Council Member Quick asked for a five-minute break. <br /> <br />Council recessed at 9:25 p.m. <br /> <br />Council reconvened at 9:36 p.m. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty said he would recommend option one and recommend that the interested <br />parties meet to discuss other options such as R-2 to limit the density in the area. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.