07-19-2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission July 19, 2017 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ Ayes – 2 (French, Klander) Nays – 3 (Love, Rundle & Stevenson) Abstain – 1 (Klebsch) Motion failed. Chair Stevenson called the question on the original motion. Ayes – 4 Nays – 2 (French, Klander) Motion carried. Planner Sevald reported a Development Review is required for construction activity in which a principal building is increased in size by more than 10%, or more than 10,000 square feet (excludes single-family and two-family dwellings). In this case, the proposed 60-unit apartment building will be 25,000 square feet in size. The building rendering and landscape plan was reviewed in detail with the Commission. Planner Sevald explained the proposed apartments will include 60-units of affordable workforce housing. Residents will have an income restriction of 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI), based on household size. During a previous Planning Commission meeting, there were questions about how many rental units there are in the City, and how many are affordable. Staff noted there are 5,280 housing units in Mounds View (2016). According to the City’s rental licensing records, there are 1,511 multi-family rental units and 240 single-family rental units (2017) (33% of total housing stock is rental). It was noted balconies were being recommended in order to enhance the pedestrian-like feel of the development. Staff provided further comment on the request, recommended the Planning Commission approve the Development Review. Commissioner Klander asked if the applicant supported City staff’s recommendations. Mr. Stokka stated it was his goal to keep the proposed building as far away from the adjacent residents as possible, which he has been able to do. He explained that if balconies were required, this would have to change. He requested the balconies not be required, but rather that bay windows be added, so as to eliminate the eyesore of items being stored on the balconies. He stated he supported the proposed play area. Commissioner Klander agreed that balconies could become an eyesore and for this reason, he could support the removal of the balconies so long as bay windows were added. Commissioner Love explained she was a fan of trees and stated she preferred the play area to be park-like that was planted with trees. She asked if the applicant supported the median at the entrance. Mr. Stokka stated he supported this recommendation. Commissioner Klebsch commented on the lighting plan and noted the applicant was proposing more lighting than required by the City. Planner Sevald reported adjustments could be made with different light fixtures, but noted more light would be required at the entrance points for safety purposes. Commissioner Klebsch stated she did not want the lighting from this site to impact the adjacent neighborhood or passing traffic. Planner Sevald recommended the light fixtures be changed in