Laserfiche WebLink
Member Cunningham asked for details concerning the projections of a traffic <br />increase on Fairview Avenue and the traffic on Oakcrest as well as the impact <br />on the neighborhood. (James Addition will be presenting a recommendation <br />regarding the intersection of Fairview/Oakcrest in future. County plans for <br />Fairview call for 4-5 lanes with turning lanes in future). <br />Chair Harms asked staff to explain the notification process and the PUD <br />process. <br />Member Mulder asked for clarification on what happens to properties if scenario <br />1 is selected and no developer is available? (Staff would prepare an RFP, a <br />developer would be selected, and a development agreement approved if Council <br />approves the comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning.) <br />Member Rhody referred to the letter from Craig Christensen and asked if TIF <br />would be used for this project? (Possibly, depending on the project). <br />Member Cunningham asked if a portion of development costs could be tied to <br />screening and parks for this project? (Yes). <br />Chair Harms requested the staff to describe the history of the Task <br />Force/process? (Mr. Welsch explained the history of proposed development and <br />current moratorium, which is in effect until April 28, 1998). <br />Member Klausing asked whether the development process (RFP, etc) be started <br />while this decision is being made (This is up to the City Council). <br />Craig Christensen, Chairman of the James Addition Task Force, presented <br />??? <br />information on the Task Forces activities and charge and the overall Task <br />Force recommendation and make up of the Task Force. He advised they had <br />met eight times since June, kept neighbors informed, and that the last meeting <br />was in March 1998. He outlined issues, and discussed the basis for <br />recommendations, and what the recommendations are. He requested that the <br />Planning Commission recommend approval of scenario 1 (HDR - HDR - PUD). <br />Craig Christensen explained why the area should remain a residential <br />neighborhood? A consensus to stay residential was supported as follows: <br />1.Commercial has been creeping into the south boundary - at least <br />50% of the neighborhood was lost in the past to retail. <br />2.Stable, affordable homes with park and shopping, jobs and location <br />near Minneapolis/St Paul are strengths. <br />3.Transit is close. <br />4.Neighborhood is well kept and affordable. <br />5.It should remain stable place to live. <br />3 <br />