Laserfiche WebLink
October 27, 2022 PC Minutes <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />located, and whether a large apartment complex could be integrated into a mixed -use development. <br />Staff recalled comments received by the EDA which placed importance on preserving the existing <br />commercial designations along CSAH 8. <br /> <br />Commissioner Andress stated that the property features a very desirable corner with the intersection <br />of CSAH 8 and TH 61, and that he would like to see a proposal that blends in well and achieves the <br />goals of the Downtown Plan. <br /> <br />Commissioner Petty stated that she is trying to visualize how the proposed apartments would look <br />when viewed from CSAH 8. Bear stated that the discussion topics staff posed are to consider such <br />issues. Commissioner Petty mentioned an apartment building in Forest Lake which is located very close <br />to a frontage road, and has concerns about encroachment on major roadways. <br /> <br />The applicant, Peter Stalland approached the Planning Commission stating that he wanted to give <br />comments from a development perspective. Stalland stated that it is too expensive and risky to <br />develop the property all at once, and believes that an apartment project is the best starting point for <br />developing the whole property. Stalland showed the Commissioners a redesigned sketch plan, which <br />had not been reviewed by staff, that shows the building orientation flipped and located closer to the <br />corner of CSAH 8 and TH 61. Stalland stated that areas further to the southwest of the property <br />wouldn’t work as well for the apartment project since the soil isn’t conducive to underground parking. <br /> <br />Commissioner Arcand asks about the topography of the southerly areas on t he property which are <br />guided for low-density residential. Stalland says that the necessary modifications would be too <br />expensive to construct his desired product. Commissioner Arcand replies that he is not in favor of <br />apartments being located right on CSAH 8, which he feels is better suited for commercial frontage. <br /> <br />Chair Kleissler says that having standalone apartments on CSAH 8 would significantly disrupt the <br />surrounding area. Commissioner Derr adds that the existing Rosemary apartments are located behind <br />several commercial developments relative to the county highway. <br /> <br />Commissioner Arcand states that a lot of time and energy was put into the Comprehensive Plan <br />process, and that the decision to alter the plan should not be taken lightly. Commissioner Derr adds <br />that the residents favored commercial use along the county highway during that process. <br /> <br />Chair Kleissler asked the Commissioners to give feedback on the idea of incorporating the apartments <br />in a Mixed-Use development. Commissioner Petty stated that she would not be in favor of a long wall <br />encroaching on TH 61. Commissioner Arcand stated that he would not be pleased without commercial <br />uses on the corner of CSAH 8 and TH 61. Stalland agrees with the Commissioners that small -scale <br />commercial on that corner would be best, and that he would be interested in making Comprehensive <br />Plan and zoning amendments although it is financially intensive. <br /> <br />Commissioner Petty asks if the apartments could be moved to the south of the commercially <br />designated areas along the county highway. Stalland responds that the option has been considered but <br />the extension of infrastructure would be intensive.