Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission May 4, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 7 <br /> <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />plan does not make sense and it should have another access into this development in a different <br />location but not out at Groveland. <br /> <br />Fern Arvidson of 2833 Sherwood Road said she is opposed to this as it is too much for the area. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:41 p.m. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zwirn indicated that the developer has done some work to purchase more <br />property to obtain the necessary three acres for the PUD but, after hearing the testimony of the <br />neighbors, they have all talked about the access situation and that is the primary concern is for <br />traffic flow and to make this viable he thinks the developer needs to address an additional access <br />or eliminate some of the housing to appease the community and address the concerns about <br />privacy with the way the townhomes are laid out so they are not looking into peoples’ backyards. <br />He added that he thinks this would be a good development in this area but it needs to have <br />another access. <br /> <br /> Commissioner Zwirn asked if the developer is amenable to addressing those issues. <br /> <br />Mr. Bourassa indicated they are willing to work on the privacy issues and can meet with City <br />Staff and/or neighbors individually. He said that with respect to the access issues what he heard <br />is for a potential access onto Groveland through that lot on 8060 but they are not proposing that. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zwirn asked if there is a way to work this so there is an additional access. <br /> <br />The developer indicated the only access that he could see would be on Groveland. <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch commented that this is difficult because if you put commercial on <br />Highway 10 a lot of people do not want commercial backed up to residential. She believes there <br />is too much for this site and maybe there could be some other options. <br /> <br />Mr. Bourassa indicated the original plan considered commercial on that piece in the SE corner of <br />the parcel but with the required setbacks the potential for commercial development is the size of <br />a twin home and after working with Staff on this they thought a residential PUD would be more <br />amenable. <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch suggested removing some townhomes to make more space on the inside of <br />the development and suggested looking at some type of access on the other side of the pond. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson said he does not see how this is in conjunction with plans for the <br />Comprehensive Plan that the City has had all along. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller agreed that this would really shut off any other possible commercial <br />developments along Highway 10 and some of the residents have indicated that going back to the