Agenda Packets - 2022/12/12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

From: Nyle Zikmund To: Jon Sevald Subject: FW: Woodale Apartments Proposed Project Date: Monday, November 28, 2022 5:24:35 AM Add to the file! From: mgavett [mailto:mgavett@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2022 2:12 PM To: Nyle Zikmund <nyle.zikmund@moundsviewmn.org> Subject: Woodale Apartments Proposed Project Caution: This email originated outside our organization; please use caution. Dear city council members and city planning personnel, Warning this is a lot of detail about the opposition of the Woodale apartment proposed project (sorry). This is an outline of why you should not approve this project as planned by the developers. We have reviewed the project and watched the meeting video, It sounds great but not here on this small corner behind all the R1 homes and on currently zoned R1 lots. The developer's purchase agreement has nothing to do with the request and should not influence your decision about this proposal as it should not have been purchased before zoning and project approval by the city first. You saw an out pouring of locals from this neighborhood and if these developments were brought to the entire city for vote you were shown disapproval for this development. Please vote NO as there have been and are many other developments addressing this same housing need. The huge development on Co Rd J and Long Lake/Airport rd. along with the skyline (old hwy 8 project not to mention recently added Groveland and Greystone Flats plus Bel Rea and the units in Spring Lake Park and Along 35w in Shoreview (Rice Creek area - The Edison developments) have all added so much housing to the area that the schools and Police have been having trouble keeping up. I personally have had police (city violation) calls skipped and the police chief and city admin have been made aware and reached back to discuss why the reports (violation calls) were skipped. This is not what Mounds View needs and should be addressed before more High Density developments are added to the city. 1) Zoning if changed should be R4 not PUD as these are by definition apartments and R4 zoning is for high density apartments. No reason for PUD zoning. And as a result of R4 zoning this should have an R2 buffer between the R1 and R4 zones per zoning ordinances. PUD next to R1 is uncalled for and causes undue stress and development stress with property values and negative desired sales for the existing R1 homes (If this project goes through). 2) Safety — Neighborhood safety single egress for this residential area was an issue brought forward by the MV Fire chief when the Everest development (white buildings) and Woodale connection to MVBLD was discussed and all local residences at city hall voting against the Woodale connection. The fire chief brought forward a letter stating the need for multiple egress into and out of this residential are for fire safety and truck access since a single egress was not safe so a second route for access speed was desired and forced trough to this area. Now with Greystone Flats closing the Greedfield access the city has gone back against the fire chiefs recommendation and previously voted on city approval has now been revoked