CC MINUTES 10272020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

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