Laserfiche WebLink
1 the neighborhood and probably would be a requirement <br /> 2 of the Rice Creek watershed District; <br /> 0 reiterated that because of the parcel' s proximity to <br /> 4 the railroad track and because of major soil correc- <br /> 5 tions which would be necessary, single family resi- <br /> 6 dential development on the site would be economically <br /> 7 unfeasible; <br /> 8 reported the proposal met the 1980 Comprehensive Plan <br /> 9 which showed medium density residential in this area; <br /> 10 pointed to the fact that developed lots to the west <br /> 11 are 300 feet deep which would leave a major separation <br /> 12 between the development and those homes; <br /> 13 explained how Tax Increment subsidy of soil correction <br /> 14 costs would make the project feasible; <br /> 15 reported staff had received four calls related to the <br /> 16 .project - one from the New Brighton. City Planner who <br /> 17 reported receiving calls from New Brighton residents on <br /> 18 Oakwood; the second from a New Brighton resident who <br /> 19 requested copies of the plan; and two from Silver Lane <br /> 20 residents ; <br /> 11 Mr. Oertwich, who lives on Silver Lane adjacent to the <br /> 22 property, who had questions about the landscaped buffer <br /> 3 of his property and another from another resident who <br /> 4 ,didn' t seem to have strong objections but had questions <br /> 25 about how his property would be affected; <br /> 26 told Commissioner Werenicz a Tax Increment District <br /> 27 would have to be formed to provide soil correction <br /> 28 money for the project and that was somewhat up in the <br /> 29 air because the legislature was just that day con- <br /> 30 siderirg changes which might change how Tax Increment <br /> 31 Districts work. <br /> 32 Proponents: Vern Hoium, Evergreen President <br /> 33 Ursula Sheehy, Vice President and responsible for mark- <br /> 34 eting <br /> - 35 Jim Hill, . Planning and Design who had made the prelim- <br /> 36 inary drawings presented that evening <br /> 37 Steven Yurick, planning consultant. <br /> 38 Mr. Hoium reiterated some of the information related to the project <br /> 39 which had .been contained in the Evergreen memorandum attached to their <br /> 40 Petition for Rezoning. He and Ms. Sheehy emphasized the perception <br /> 41 they had gained from focus groups and marketing that a number of <br /> 42 prospective buyers in the 55 and over age range had indicated a desire <br /> 43 to have bedrooms on the first level rather than on multi-levels as in <br /> J <br /> • 9 <br />