02-21-23-WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Attachment C North Heights Church Apartments Proposed Project Presented — Market Rate Standard Apartments (not age restricted senior living) 7/29/2021 Neighborhood Meeting — Public Comments Comment Card #1: o "1 do not want to see this. There is plenty of development about to happen at TCAAP and the traffic flow + noise from Hwy 10 and deforestation is about to be a nightmare in this area. I am not convinced that this will be anything other than low income with greedy Ramsey County in the mix. Wait a few years when this property degrades and people see the problems with living here! Also Hwy 96 is dangerous as -is at these intersections and adding these residents won't help! The last thing I want is more danger or some terrible Idea like a round -about. Another signal would see equal if not great accident rates to Lexington's Hwy 96 intersection. NO THANK YOU! Will not support. Also, WE DO NOT WANT Public Transit in this area!" • Comment Card #2: o "1 do not know why I was not notified of this meeting when I would be directly affected by this (Colleen Ct). Residents across the highway were notified. So this public meeting seems to be directed at those that may be less affected. TCAP seems like enough development. Quality of life, property values, crime levels —very concerned about how this would be affect by this apartment complex." • Comment Card #3: o "No apartments — would prefer townhomes. Traffic issues!" • Developer's anecdotal summary/interpretation of verbal feedback received is outlined below. These are not direct and/or written quotes. These notes may unintentionally include errors or interpretations by the developer that are different than what was intended by the person(s) verbalizing comments. o Traffic ■ There are concerns about apartment residents utilizing/going-through the church parking lot to enter/exit on the east side of the church site —to Snelling. This was a major and consistent concern. ■ Market apartments, w/kids, will result in extra traffic to Royal Park; and the current infrastructure (pedestrian connections, park equipment, park vehicular parking) doesn't have capacity to handle and isn't safe. This was a major and consistent concern. ■ Will result in extra traffic through neighborhood to the east (rather than using Hwy 96); and the current infrastructure doesn't have capacity to handle. This would be for apt residents trying to go towards St. Paul/694 E. Additionally, the current condition of this infrastructure is a concern. This was a major and consistent concern. ■ There are existing concerns about traffic along old Highway 10; and that this project won't help and could potentially have a negative effect. Additionally, the condition of nearby road infrastructure is a concern. o Sound ■ This site may not work for apts due to the noise from the adjacent Highways. ■ A sound wall will be constructed along Highway 10 in the future; residents of the apartment will not desire the new wall. ■ Noise along Old Highway 10 a major concern currently. ■ What sound mitigation will occur for this apartment? o This project will decrease the value of all the homes in the neighborhood to the east. o Why doesn't the developer construction senior living age restricted apartments —rather than standard market apartments that will have families with kids? o Why not construct condos? o Why not construct town homes? o What is the current zoning? o No low-income housing desired. NOTE: the Developer generally observed about 25-30 residents in attendance