Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission May 17, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 10 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson asked the applicant to address the Commission. He noted that the proposal was <br />rejected last year and asked how this proposal satisfies the concerns expressed at that time. <br /> <br />Brian Bourassa, Project Manager representing Integra Homes, stated they have worked with <br />numerous proposals, both commercial and residential, and met with commercial investors and <br />planners. They also met with Mrs. Johnson regarding her parcel and potential to combine her <br />property. Based on the research and discussions held, they decided to move forward separate <br />from Mrs. Johnson. Mr. Bourassa asked permission to present the plans they have drafted. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stated a vision has to be seen in order to consider a rezoning. <br /> <br />Mr. Bourassa displayed a site plan of the proposal. He explained the people they talked with <br />were not conducive to an aggressive commercial opportunity but more of an office-type of <br />building. Then they investigated the surrounding area to see what was available for office and <br />found an inventory is available. Mr. Bourassa stated they talked with the Johnsons, investors, <br />and staff. Then the plan was developed for a townhome type product with single access to <br />County Road 10. <br /> <br />Mr. Bourassa explained this proposal differs from the last one because it has less density, is not a <br />PUD with rear or side yard deviations, and is a straight forward R-3 development. He noted they <br />propose a series of buildings with a common central area, increased open space, and have <br />addressed the parking comments that were made. In an effort to not box in or spot develop along <br />the corridor, they will provide transportation links to access the Johnson parcel to the northwest <br />as well as to the west to provide linkage to the abutting property. He noted the building <br />configuration has also been changed and more aggressive landscaping is planned. He advised <br />that experienced commercial people have said that high end retail business will not fit on this <br />site. <br /> <br />Mr. Bourassa stated they agree with staff that there is a need for this type of townhome product, <br />which is not a high rise. They investigated senior housing but that did not work out with the <br />evaluation. He stated they then worked with staff on a coordinated development and hope the <br />linkages being provided will work into that concept. <br /> <br />Mr. Bourassa asked how the City differentiates townhomes from multi-family housing. Director <br />Ericson stated the question is what is allowed in an R-3 district, which allows for up to six units <br />in a townhome building. Up to six multi-family units would be allowed with a conditional use <br />permit. Anything more than six units would need a higher density, R-4 zoning. Director Ericson <br />noted that with a townhome, each has its own access, garage, and is owner-occupied. If this <br />application is approved, then 19 individual lots would be created. With a multi-family project, <br />there would not be individual lots and the tenants would be leasing the space. <br /> <br />Mr. Bourassa explained that with this product, they are individually owned units with a common <br />area around the outside. To prevent unsightliness, the common space is maintained by an <br />association so there will not be individual lawn mowers. The grounds will be irrigated and