Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council June 26, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 9 <br />Mayor Marty noted that the Staff report was very thorough and referred to the surrounding area <br />as being single-family residential. He said while an enhanced market value is desirable, the <br />higher density would be detrimental to the surrounding area. He said during the Planning <br />Commission public hearings, only one individual spoke in favor of the development, a Spring <br />Lake Park resident. He pointed out that based on comments at the meetings, residents' <br />underlying concern was that development was not what was originally intended when it was <br />designate a mixed -use area, and that approval would eliminate the ability for a comprehensive <br />block -wide project. <br />Mayor Marty explained that a year ago when Integra first approached the City, they were unable <br />to purchase the adjoining properties. He said it is the City's hope to develop the entire area <br />rather than taking a chunk out of the middle. IIe noted that in their summary, the Planning <br />Commission recommended unanimously that the Council authorize a study of the area for a <br />better use for the land. He pointed out that the Planning Commission and residents believe there <br />is a better use than the town home development. <br />Mayor Marty said, as stated earlier in the EDA meeting, that a feasibility study is more proactive <br />to determine what City wants and what would fit in to the area. Ile said instead of being reactive <br />to certain projects, the City needs to be proactive to determine the best use for land. <br />Mayor Marty added that at present, he is not convinced that reducing density from 21 to 19 units <br />is a big change, regardless of the re -alignment of the units. He stated he is not convinced the <br />town home project is the best use for the area and cannot approve re -zoning. Mayor Marty said <br />the Council can override Planning Commission recommendations, but there has to be a very <br />strong argument to do so and he has not seen such to date. <br />Councilmember Gunn questioned what the original intent was for the area, considering it was <br />continually mentioned. Community Development Director Ericson said there is a difference of <br />opinion regarding the original intent, and there is nothing in writing specifying the exact nature <br />of the original intent. He said that some people remember it being commercially intended, others <br />believe it was to be more residential. He said the Planning Commission has taken the opinion <br />that the town home development is not what was originally intended. <br />Councilmember Flaherty said he is not yet ready to disregard the development. He said he wants <br />to see the proposal first. He agreed that there must be extenuating circumstances to go against <br />the recommendation of the Planning Commission, but he is not ready to dismiss it. <br />Councilmember Gun said she believes the Council needs more details, planning, and exact <br />renderings before they make a decision. <br />Councilmember Thomas stated it would help to have a discussion about "if not this, then what." <br />She said there is only a certain amount of detail the property owners can provide at this point and <br />if town homes are not what are desired for the area, the Council needs to decide what the original <br />