My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2018/07/02
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2018
>
Agenda Packets - 2018/07/02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/29/2025 2:32:38 PM
Creation date
9/11/2018 4:21:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
7/2/2018
Description
Work Session
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
6/25/2018
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
253
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Item 02 <br />Page 2 <br />Recommendation <br />The City Council is requested to provide a consensus on which option to move forward with. <br />Roger Fink (Trident Developments), and Scott Teigen, (Kwik Trip) will be in attendance, if the <br />Council has any questions. <br />Staff is recommending Option 2 (apartments & Kwik Trip), because; (1) it more closely follows <br />the Council's vision for mixed-use; (2) the commercial component makes the project more <br />financially feasible; and (3) there is demand for a grocery store, which Kwik Trip serves, in -part. <br />Staff is in the process of compiling results of the 2018 community survey. Of the 100 responses <br />evaluated thus far, the question; "What businesses or conveniences would you frequently use <br />(on a weekly basis) if in Mounds View?", the highest demand is for gas stations (12%), full- <br />service (large) grocery store (11%), and family sit-down restaurant (10%). There is a 5% <br />demand for a "convenience (small) grocery store" (e.g. Kwik Trip). <br />Of the concerns expressed by the public, the PUD and Development Review process will <br />address these items. The current site plan exists as a sketch, and has not been evaluated for <br />compliance with the City Code (not enough information is available at the sketch plan stage). <br />As a PUD, there is much flexibility from the City Code, which is needed to maximize the density <br />of the project (e.g. 2 or 4 acers = 34 or 70 units permitted, whereas 63 or 135 units are <br />proposed). With either option, there will be additional traffic on local streets. A traffic study <br />would include recommendations to mitigate neighbor's concerns, however, diverting traffic <br />does not lessen the numbers. It just moves it to someone else's street. <br />Once a direction is provided (Option 1 or 2), Staff recommends that the EDA meet in a closed <br />session at its July 9t" meeting to discuss a land sale price range, and to meet on a future date <br />TBD with INH Properties to negotiate a purchase agreement. This negotiation would also be in <br />a closed session. <br />Respectfully, <br />e• V <br />Jon Sevald, AICP <br />City Planner / Supervisor <br />ATTACHMENTS <br />1 <br />Brian Be an, MBA <br />Business Development Coordinator <br />Neighborhood Meeting Notice, Mailing Area and residence of those speaking <br />Developer's Presentation <br />Written Comments Submitted <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.