Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council December 11, 2017 <br />Regular Meeting Page 5 <br />1 building with underground parking. He noted the parcel was zoned R-4 and was within the <br />2 Mounds View Boulevard overlay district. The building standards for this overlay district were <br />3 described further. The location of the pedestrian trail and lighting was noted. The parking and <br />4 landscaping requirements for the development were reviewed. It was noted the developer would <br />5 work to save as many of the existing trees as possible. <br />6 <br />7 Council Member Meehlhause asked if the development would have access to Groveland Road. <br />8 City Planner/Supervisor Sevald stated the development would no longer have access to <br />9 Groveland Road. <br />10 <br />11 Council Member Meehlhause requested further information from Staff on Tax Increment <br />12 Financing and how the use of these funds would impact residents. Finance Director Beer <br />13 explained when a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District is created this allows base property <br />14 values to be frozen. He described how this allowed developers to come in and improve <br />15 properties and for taxes to be collected on the increment of the improvements. <br />16 <br />17 Council Member Meehlhause questioned if property taxes would be collected on the four <br />18 properties the same as was being collected today. Finance Director Beer reported this was the <br />19 case and noted this project would have no adverse impact on Mounds View taxpayers. <br />20 <br />21 Council Member Meehlhause stated he understood the City of Spring Lake Park opposed the <br />22 closing of the access point to the old fire department building. He asked if Spring Lake Park <br />23 understood this was a recommendation by Ramsey County and not the City of Mounds View. <br />24 City Planner/Supervisor Sevald explained this information had been passed along to Spring Lake <br />25 Park. <br />26 <br />27 Council Member Meehlhause commented on the Planning Commission's vote for denial. He <br />28 explained the Planning Commission had approved the rezoning, the Conditional Use Permit and <br />29 the Preliminary Plat. He noted the only item the Planning Commission did not recommend <br />30 approval of was the Development Review. City Planner/Supervisor Sevald stated this was the <br />31 case. <br />32 <br />33 Council Member Meehlhause discussed the four reasons the Planning Commission <br />34 recommended denial of the Development Review. He reported the Commissioners did not have <br />35 an issue with workforce housing but rather had concerns with traffic on Groveland Road. City <br />36 Planner/Supervisor Sevald commented affordable housing in Mounds View was not a concern, <br />37 but rather the concentration of affordable housing. He noted another recommendation of the <br />38 Planning Commission was to locate this development closer to an area that provides goods and <br />39 services to low income individuals. The other concerns voiced were with traffic concerns along <br />40 Mounds View Boulevard and Groveland Road. <br />41 <br />42 Council Member Meehlhause anticipated that the Planning Commission would have offered their <br />43 support to the Development Review on a 5-2 vote with the new access point on Mounds View <br />44 Boulevard. <br />45 <br />