Laserfiche WebLink
his thought process is that it will evolve when there is enough density to support it. So that <br />becomes a marketing issue. He said there is not enough density here for chains like Chipotle. He <br />pointed out the City now has something like 2000 housing units. He questioned what the density <br />needs to be. Once that density is reached, maybe then it would be feasible to revisit the west side <br />of Armstrong Boulevard for the big box retail mall. He asked how the City can play a role in <br />facilitating that. <br />Board Member Valentine mentioned there are a lot of small malls around the Cities that are empty. <br />He warned the Board to be careful of this. He suggested in the scope of this Board, we should <br />consider the sites as if they are individual sites. There should be some stormwater management <br />before deciding what could go in there. If housing is considered, how does the density affect the <br />impervious area, compared to single homes. <br />Board Member Lewis pointed out the City would be sacrificing trails and shoulders with the big <br />box potential mall development. The pedestrian orientation from the area west of Zeolite Street <br />became less important and more auto centric. He stated some of the new housing north of Bunker <br />Lake Boulevard may not be interested in looking at a large Kmart type building where the anchor <br />retails was planned. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill said in discussions with all the Boards, something may <br />come up to make that area more palatable. We can take the best of some neighboring communities <br />and try to come up with something more attractive. <br />Board Member Lewis commented it would be difficult to get a developer to do an upscale shopping <br />area without the housing to support it. <br />Board Member Bentz said he was disappointed in the notes in regards to blue stream. He <br />questioned if any of that would be coming forward from the open space discussion. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill responded staff is working on how to best present that <br />information. Staff is getting feedback in regard to Lake Ramsey Commons being a shared property <br />between the surrounding parcels. <br />Board Member Bentz suggested planning more with Lake Ramsey and consider whether it could <br />be made a usable lake. He suggested looking at putting in storm draining before it hits the river. <br />He further advised to create a list of all the things we do not want to happen again. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill stated this could be a good addition to the questions <br />for the other Boards. It would be helpful to solicit input as to what they think the issues have been <br />and ask if this is the right direction aesthetically. <br />Councilmember LeTourneau went back to the point of the view shed for those homeowners that <br />are now looking at retail buildings. He asked if the original aesthetics are in place, or if they should <br />be revisited. He noted the diameter of the trees was changed, and other designs were left out due <br />to cost. He questioned if design standards have changed. <br />Board Member Lewis posed the question of which is faster — bringing in big box retailing, or <br />housing. <br />Environmental Policy Board / August 17, 2015 <br />Page 9 of 11 <br />