PL PACKET 09252017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 28 , 2017 Page 16 garages facing the alley, impact on the school district and surface water issues. He would like the 1 developer to table everything except the commercial to high density which he is in favor of 2 because it allows for an affordable housing component. He is a commercial real estate attorney 3 by profession and believes a certain amount of density is necessary on this project and 20 units 4 per acre would make the project not economically viable. He would prefer to see the density 5 between the 25-40 range as contained in the Comp Plan. More information is needed from the 6 developer before a decision should be made. 7 8 Chairman Gondorchin agreed with Commissioner Foster and noted that if he were to make a 9 motion this evening it would be to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan amendments, 10 the preliminary PUD , and preliminary plat and direct staff to prepare a draft resolution 11 containing terms of the same. 12 13 Commissioner Bartel stated he agreed with what was previously said and added one component 14 that hasn’t been addressed is the number of parking units. He stated he lived in an apartment in 15 the city that had underground parking to accommodate the resident’s units. In the spring, he 16 preferred to park on the street as did many of the other residents. The way this is cur rently laid 17 out, 50% of the on-street parking is at one building in the farthest SW corner. As a visitor to the 18 site , he would expect to park close to whatever building he was visiting rather than in the far SW 19 corner. He stated parking needs to be looked at getting closer to City Code on ratios. 20 21 Commissioner Westrick stated she agrees with the Commissioner’s previous comments. Based 22 on what was provided in written material, she found it is difficult to support this development as 23 is with the 48 units per acre. She feels consideration of the Comp Plan at 25-40 is more 24 reasonable. She stated she has a list of 15 issues that she feels need more research. 25 26 Commissioner Papatola commended everyone for what was a very spirited conversation. He 27 stated he falls so mewhat between the other Commissioners, finding t his re -development has the 28 potential to be a positive development for the southern gateway and the City as a whole. He 29 appreciates the developer has brought in Aon to look at affordable housing and also appreciates 30 the developer has taken community comments into account in making revisions to the plan. His 31 conclusion is this is pretty much still in a draft stage. Commissioner Papatola stated s taff and the 32 Commis sion have many questions as well as the Villager s and neighbors. He encouraged the 33 developer to have more dialog with the community. He stated at this point , he would not be 34 willing to vote on any part of this plan and suggests all four parts of the request be denied. 35 36 Ms. Rothstein stated the City has 120 days to take action on any proposal submitted so unless the 37 developer provides a voluntary extension. final action would need to be taken by November 15, 38 2017. If any of the items are acted upon for recommendation, they would proceed to the City 39 Counc il and any items tabled would not be forwarded to the City Council but would come back 40 before the Planning Commission again. 41 42 Commissioner Larson stated as a homeowner in St. Anthony Village, there is a certain right and 43 expectation to improve or change o ur property as we wish. He noted the restrictions placed on 44 individual homeowners are the same as placed on everyone equally and no one is given special 45 16