My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 07192022
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2022
>
PL PACKET 07192022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2022 12:45:37 PM
Creation date
7/14/2022 12:45:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes <br />May 17, 2022 <br />Page 2 <br />1 Councilmember Webster provided background information on the goal setting that has <br />2 occurred in recent years. She thanked the Commission noting that some of the goals related to <br />3 planning are in addition to the normal workload of the Commission and helps the City address <br />4 trends and plan for the future. She stated that each of the steps is meant to bring them closer <br />5 to accomplishing the pyramid mission statement. She welcomed any questions the <br />6 Commission may have. <br />7 <br />8 Commissioner Erickson asked for more details on changes that were made. Councilmember <br />9 Webster noted a boxed area that denotes some of the changes from 2021 to 2022 and <br />10 highlighted some of those changes and/or additions. She also provided details on the <br />11 proposed resident survey, noting that a link will be available for residents that are not chosen <br />12 for the sampling to still complete the survey. <br />13 <br />14 Chair Socha commented that sometimes the discussions of the Planning Commission go <br />15 beyond the scope of planning, including economic development. She asked if it would be <br />16 appropriate for the Commission to also forward comments on other topics in the pyramid <br />17 outside of planning, as many elements work together, and the Commission members care <br />18 about more than just planning topics. Councilmember Webster acknowledged the complexity <br />19 of some of the issues brought before the Planning Commission. She agreed that it is hard to <br />20 only view something in one lens because issues are intertwined. She welcomed those <br />21 comments as it helps her to think about unintended consequences and different perspectives. <br />22 <br />23 Commissioner Hendrickson referenced a new item that mentions comparing greenspace to <br />24 density in Silver Lake Village and asked for more details. Councilmember Webster <br />25 referenced the gas station complex at 39th and Stinson Boulevard which the City purchased <br />26 several years ago. She stated that there has been a proposal to build 38 units with the same <br />27 floor plan that was already constructed to the south and therefore they are attempting to be <br />28 mindful of the greenspace that is available. She noted that the highest concentration of <br />29 children live in apartments, and they do not always have walkable access to greenspace. She <br />30 stated that they may need to be more intentional about where they plan for greenspace. <br />31 <br />32 Commissioner Hendrickson agreed that there is a lot of asphalt in that area and there would be <br />33 a great potential for improvement in that area. <br />34 <br />B.35 R-1 Zoning Amendments Discussion <br />36 <br />37 City Planner Grittman explained the purpose of this item is to initiate a discussion over the <br />38 potential for expanding buildable area on single family parcels in St. Anthony. The simple <br />39 impetus for this discussion is to consider whether there are opportunities to allow for more <br />40 significant reinvestment in existing housing stock given a changing expectation for single <br />41 family home design. He noted St. Anthony has demonstrated a strong interest in its single- <br />42 family neighborhoods for a variety of reasons. <br />43 <br />44 Chair Socha stated that she did not see anything in the report proposing a change from the 35 <br />45 to 45 percent impervious surface requirements and asked if that is proposed to stay the same. <br />46 Mr. Grittman stated that the engineer does not recommend changing those numbers but noted
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.