My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC PACKET 11102020
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2020
>
CC PACKET 11102020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2020 4:05:43 PM
Creation date
11/5/2020 11:30:12 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
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).
View images
View plain text
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br />October 27, 2020 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />V. REPORTS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF. 1 <br /> 2 <br />A. Resolution 20-081; a Resolution Approving a Request for a Preliminary Plan Stage PUD, 3 <br />constituting an amendment to the Silver Lake Village PUD, for the Interstate 4 <br />Development Multi-family residential project of 38 dwelling units at 3725 Stinson 5 <br />Boulevard NE. 6 <br /> 7 <br />City Planner Grittman reviewed the resolution with the Council and indicated that the applicant 8 <br />has submitted updated exterior plans since the Planning Commission’s review. Staff is 9 <br />recommending approval of the Preliminary Plan Stage PUD with the conditions outlined in the 10 <br />staff report. 11 <br /> 12 <br />Councilmember Walker asked in regard to Condition 14 he asked for background on why there 13 <br />was no consensus on that. Mr. Grittman indicated Condition 14 was not presented to the 14 <br />Planning Commission originally but was one of the discussion points that a couple of Planning 15 <br />Commissioners raised as being one of the items that held them back from voting in the 16 <br />affirmative for the project. 17 <br /> 18 <br />Councilmember Walker asked if the City Council required this what would be the pros and cons. 19 <br />Mr. Grittman thought the pro would be that there would be a mechanism in place that would 20 <br />ensure that affordability would be a part of this project. The con would be that a mechanism 21 <br />would need to be created in order to monitor that, which staff does not have in place right now. 22 <br /> 23 <br />Councilmember Webster asked for clarification on what the regulatory process would be for the 24 <br />City. Mr. Grittman reviewed the reporting requirement for the affordability aspect of the project. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Councilmember Jenson asked what analysis was performed to determine that water run off 27 <br />would not be a problem. Mr. Grittman indicated one of the aspects of this project is it would 28 <br />have its own storm water retention under the parking lot. 29 <br /> 30 <br />Mr. Michael Holst, Lead Developer for the project addressed the City Council. 31 <br /> 32 <br />Mayor Stille asked if anyone would like to address the City Council. No one wished to address 33 <br />the City Council. 34 <br /> 35 <br />Councilmember Jenson explained in reviewing the data put together by the Planning 36 <br />Commission, this developer is targeting people with incomes of $40,000 a year range and he was 37 <br />in favor of St. Anthony trying to move forward with this concept. He thought it was a small 38 <br />project, but it will give them a good idea if this will have good application in the future. He liked 39 <br />the idea of holding the price down where the City does not have to subsidize the developer. He 40 <br />thought this was well thought out and was in favor of this concept. 41 <br /> 42 <br />Councilmember Randle explained he also liked the project and thought it was very well thought 43 <br />out. His concern was with the parking, but it seemed like that has been resolved. There is no 44 <br />TIF which is always a plus and the fact that the developer is being creative with this project to 45 <br />14
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.