My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC MINUTES 09142021
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2021
>
CC MINUTES 09142021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/5/2021 8:43:14 AM
Creation date
10/5/2021 8:42:13 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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).
View images
View plain text
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br />September 14, 2021 <br />Page 7 <br />1 Councilmember Jenson asked if the setback requirements are compatible with the setback <br />2 requirements for the new building on the north side of this project. Mr. Grittman stated the <br />3 property going up on the north has a 60-foot setback. Councilmember Jenson asked regarding <br />4 the setback on Stinson Blvd. Mr. Grittman stated this building would be 30 feet from Stinson (R- <br />5 4 Standard) and the property to the north is quite a bit further to allow for entry and parking. <br />6 Councilmember Jenson asked if that will look ok and Mr. Grittman stated he believes it will. <br />7 They will not look out of place. <br />9 Ms. Victoria Perbix, representing Interstate Development, attended via Zoom. Councilmember <br />10 Jenson asked how many surface parking spaces will be on the site. Ms. Perbix stated there will <br />11 be 60 surface stalls on the exterior and 66 on covered ground level parking. Ms. Perbix stated the <br />12 overall concept of the project to have affordability for the residents. This building is not overly <br />13 amenitized and residents can make decisions on what they want and do not want and have <br />14 control over their rent amount and manage their budget. The underground parking would be fully <br />15 utilized. Councilmember Jenson asked about where the surface parkers park when snow removal <br />16 is being done? Ms. Perbix stated she doesn't have a good answer but they may have utilized <br />17 phased snow removal. Councilmember Jenson asked if the NE Minneapolis residents would need <br />18 to be notified there may be cars parking on streets during snow plowing. Ms. Perbix stated that <br />19 would not be the developer's intent. <br />20 <br />21 Councilmember Walker asked if there were other rationales other than affordability to charge <br />22 extra for underground parking. During the winter months, from an operational point of view how <br />23 would plowing of the parking lot be done. Ms. Perbix stated the concept of the covered parking <br />24 making it first come first serve, it would not be fair to charge everyone. Bike storage is being <br />25 considered in the front of the underground stall. The open underground parking stalls may be <br />26 utilized temporarily. <br />27 <br />28 Councilmember Randle stated there is always the issue with plowing of multi -family parking <br />29 lots. Everyone cannot afford underground parking. The management needs to notify residents 24 <br />30 hours ahead of time prior to plowing. There are ways to work around the parking issue. <br />31 <br />32 Mayor Stille stated every project he finances, charges more for covered parking. <br />33 <br />34 Councilmember Webster stated she thinks about since it is workforce housing. There was a study <br />35 that one-third of 18-year-olds do not have a driver's license. Since this project is on a bus line, <br />36 the residents may wish to take a bus or bike to work. This is not a unique situation to this project. <br />37 <br />38 Councilmember Jenson asked if the 14 recommended conditions were acceptable to the <br />39 developer. Commissioner Morita stated the reason the Planning Commission made an issue of <br />40 this is because of the limited off -site parking available adjacent to the project. <br />41 <br />42 Mayor Stille stated the public hearing was held at the Planning Commission Meeting but <br />43 welcomed any residents with comments to make them. <br />44 <br />45 Mr. Thomas Isaacson, 2604 Pahl Avenue, asked for clarification and noted he is not in favor of a <br />46 driveway off Stinson to the multi -family development. He asked about a future driveway being <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.