My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2022/12/12
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2022
>
Agenda Packets - 2022/12/12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:51:42 PM
Creation date
1/10/2023 2:33:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
12/12/2022
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
Packets
Date
12/12/2022
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.
/
241
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
Mounds View City Council November 28, 2022 <br />Regular Meeting Page 10 <br />1 Mayor Mueller indicated she was concerned about the number of exceptions within this PUD. She <br />2 stated City Code would require this development to have 350 parking spaces and the developer <br />3 was only proposing to have 198 spaces. She believed this was a major concern given the fact the <br />4 site was estimated to have 340+ residents. She feared an undue burden would be placed on the <br />5 neighborhood if traffic were to spill out from the apartment complex into the neighborhood. She <br />6 believed the developer was trying to shoe -horn a large project onto a small lot. She understood <br />7 that single family homes was not the right fit for this property, but nor did not believe this large of <br />8 a project was the right fit for the property, especially given the traffic concerns surrounding this <br />9 site. She reported the City of Arden Hills would be constructing a great deal of housing on their <br />10 327 acres of vacant land at some point in the near future. She stated she would hate to see Mound <br />11 View using its last five acres of undeveloped land to put up another apartment building when the <br />12 City already had over 30% of its population living in rental housing. She explained she appreciated <br />13 the efforts of the developer, but noted she did not support this project. <br />14 <br />15 Council Member Meehlhause asked if staff had traffic count information for Woodale between <br />16 Mound View Boulevard and Edgewood. City Administrator Zikmund stated staff has not put its <br />17 counters out on this stretch of roadway. <br />18 <br />19 Public Works/Parks and Recreation Director Peterson commented on the history of Woodale Drive <br />20 noting that it used to be a State Aid roadway. He explained in 2016 the City was over its allotment <br />21 for State Aid. For this reason, the City made a decision to pull this roadway out of the State Aid <br />22 program. He indicated there were no recent traffic counts from the State for this roadway, which <br />23 meant the last official counts would be from 2015. <br />24 <br />25 MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Cermak. To Waive the First Reading and Introduce Ordinance <br />26 998, Amending the Official Zoning Map for 2310 Mounds View Boulevard, from R-1 Single <br />27 Family Residential to PUD Planned Unit Development. <br />28 <br />29 Mayor Mueller encouraged the Council to consider if they need more information, such as a traffic <br />30 study, before moving forward with this project. He invited the Council to visit this area of Mounds <br />31 View and to visualize how a large apartment complex would impact these neighbors. <br />32 <br />33 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Table Action on Ordinance 998 to the December 12, 2022 <br />34 City Council meeting. <br />35 <br />36 Community Development Director Sevald stated if the Council were to table action on the first <br />37 reading of this ordinance to December, the remaining items for this project would not be <br />38 considered until January of 2023. <br />39 <br />40 City Administrator Zikmund reported an action to table is non -debatable. <br />41 <br />42 Council Member Bergeron asked what would be gained or lost by tabling action on this item. City <br />43 Attorney Riggs reported the City would lose time but noted the City could gain additional <br />44 information, such as a traffic study. <br />45 <br />46 Council Member Meehlhause questioned if staff could have a traffic study completed by December <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.