My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-21-2006
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
06-21-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/30/2018 10:09:03 AM
Creation date
8/30/2018 10:07:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
6/21/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
145
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 Planning Commission June 7, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 4 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />this lot to make it appealing to business. In her opinion, rezoning this area to R-3 breaks up her <br />property and makes it less valuable. Mrs. Johnson also believes the additional traffic and one way <br />in and out of the townhome development will cause safety and traffic issues. She is in favor of <br />using this area for business development. <br /> <br />Mr. Mark Schnor, 2949 County Road 10, appeared before the Planning Commission and asked <br />what the Commissioners would like to see in this area. Mr. Schnor said he loves where he is at <br />and asked the Commission how they would feel about townhomes in their back yards. Mr. Schnor <br />indicated that the plan last year was for 21 homes on less than three acres, now the plan is for 19 <br />townhomes with the required three acres. He sees no real major change other than the tax base <br />created for Mounds View. He also indicated the drainage ditch, previously in the back, will be <br />moved to the front of the development and questioned what type of aesthetic view this will create <br />for Mounds View. If townhomes are built, he questions what can be built to the west, if there <br />would there be enough acreage for additional housing units, and what safety factors will be <br />created. Mr. Schnor does not want to see County Road 10 become chopped up. He also brought <br />up potential safety issues with a townhome development and access for fire vehicles and also <br />garbage trucks within the development. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland asked Mr. Schnor if he has a preference for what is built on this property. <br />Mr. Schnor questioned if the townhomes are the right way to go or should businesses be built. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland shared that when the Comprehensive Plan was developed, the B-3 zoning <br />was in hopes of that having the option to not doing a PUD would encourage more business <br />development along County Road 10. He also stated that affordable housing and rental property <br />was discussed. At that time Mounds View was at a higher rate than in adjacent cities. He believes <br />the idea behind the Comprehensive Plan is to develop more business along County Road 10. <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch stressed she does not feel traffic will be an issue. She also feels the vision <br />for the Comprehensive Plan was for more business and is in favor of that option. Commissioner <br />Scotch would like to see the whole strip purchased to enhance the City. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland contends that Mounds View has a limited amount of space for business <br />development. <br /> <br />Acting Chair Miller expressed her understanding of the Comprehensive Plan. She also believes it <br />is for business development and townhomes are not part of the plan. <br /> <br />Director Ericson stated that development of the corridor is continually being worked on. Mounds <br />View has vacant buildings in the area but this could change in time with the Medtronic project, the <br />Viking Stadium, or other developers could renew their interest in the County Road 10 corridor. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zwirn pointed out he hears lots of discussion on the corridor development. This <br />discussion leads to the question of what to develop – residential or business. He expressed the <br />problems of having a business near a residential area include vandalism, lighting issues, property <br />maintenance, congregation of youth and others. He feels the Commission should look at which
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.