Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission June 19, 2019 <br />Regular Meeting Page 5 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Mixed Use PUD. He discussed how the development would impact the School District and <br />noted the street closures that were being considered. Staff commented further on the proposed <br />PUD and recommended the Planning Commission approve the CUP and Development Review <br />as requested. <br /> <br />Corey Gerads, Alliance Building, discussed the shoebox lighting that would be installed within <br />the development. He explained the lighting could be adjusted to ensure there was not light <br />spilling form the property onto adjacent properties. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Sevald discussed a letter received from Planning <br />Commissioner Monn. He explained Commissioner Monn had concerns with the fact the <br />apartments were meeting the bare minimums. In addition, she was concerned with the fact this <br />project was not being developed as a mixed use development. <br /> <br />Commissioner Farmer explained a mixed use developments required population and occurs over <br />time. Community Development Director Sevald reported this was the case. He commented on a <br />few mixed use projects within first-ring suburbs, but that there are none along County Road 10, <br />from Mounds View until downtown Anoka. <br /> <br />Jim Illies commented on the modern amenities that would be provided within the apartment <br />complex, compared to those noted in Commissioner Monn’s letter. He explained most of his <br />renters prefer to have an outlet in their kitchen islands which means they could not be moveable. <br />He indicated a garden space was not being planned, nor was a pool. He reported a guest suite <br />was not being designated at this time, but could be considered in the future. He provided further <br />comment on the energy efficiency within the units. He discussed the keyless security system that <br />would be in place for the building. <br /> <br />Commissioner Nelson commented on the proposed parking spaces. He noted the applicant was <br />proposing to have 261 spaces when the City required 320. He asked if the property would have <br />adequate parking for tenants and guests. Community Development Director Sevald reviewed the <br />proposed parking within the development and noted there was also on-street parking available <br />adjacent to the apartment building. <br /> <br />Jim Illies reported he manages thousands of apartment units and noted the 2:1 parking ratio was <br />very common. He stated he did not anticipate this property would have any problems with <br />parking. <br /> <br />Commissioner Nelson asked if the property would have management available onsite. Jim Illies <br />reported this was the case, noting full time staff would be located in the building, along with a <br />full-time maintenance person. <br /> <br />Commissioner Nelson questioned how long the applicant would have to maintain the trees and <br />landscaping. Community Development Director Sevald reported the City would require the <br />applicant to maintain the trees and landscaping for the first year. Jim Illies explained he wanted <br />the site heavily landscaped.