|
10
<br />Z) ;
<br />Kate McGolugh, Project Manager, Aeon (1625 Park Avenue, Mpis., MN 55404)
<br />51
<br />Ann Holmes, ,Appllcant Representative
<br />52
<br />David Witt, Collaborative Design Group, Inc. (100 Portland Avenue S, Suite 100, Mpls., MN)
<br />53,
<br />Ms. McGou�gh advised that, after code discussions with ' h the Fire Marshal, options were still being
<br />54.
<br />considered on the size of the units — whether 1 or 2 bedrooms., with. a huge demand being sought
<br />55
<br />for 2- (bedroom units., Ms. Mc Gough clarified that. 3-4 bedroom units were being considered for the
<br />56
<br />new consitruction, Phase 11, following more study and market research. Ms. Mc Gough confirmed
<br />57
<br />that the intent of the remodel of existing units, beyond maintenance and repair, was to make them
<br />158
<br />m ore energy- efficient in response to the environment, as well as from a management and tenant
<br />59
<br />standpoint to keep energy costs as low as possible for those residents.
<br />60
<br />Ms. MlcGough advised that they were working with the Center for Energy and Environment and
<br />6,1
<br />piroplosed to redo the heating, roofs, windows, and replace appliances and light fixtures with
<br />62
<br />Energy Star, rated units.
<br />63
<br />Chair Blakeman asked Ms. McGough to, summarize their neighborhood meeting, and public
<br />6 4
<br />comment at that level.
<br />(35
<br />Ms. McGolugh o,plined that of the fifteen (15) attending the neighborhood meeting, most were
<br />66
<br />igeneralllly supportive, recognizing the. need to spruce up and redevelop the property, for the
<br />(57
<br />benefit of the property and the neighborhood., Ms. McGough noted that the majority of those in
<br />68
<br />attendance were those renting condominiums adjacent to the subject property; and the majority of
<br />6 19.
<br />concerns expressed related to drainage issues, height, of the new building; parking; landscaping
<br />70
<br />lndl buffers between the subject property arndl condolminium buildings; and the ultimate owner of
<br />71
<br />the. project.
<br />72
<br />Ms,. Mc Gough clarified the intent of the improvements in regarding the site and manage
<br />73,
<br />1,
<br />stormwater on their site; noting that 'they, continued to work with engineers toward that goal,.
<br />74
<br />relating ongoing current damage to lower level units and the need for resolution.
<br />75
<br />Mr. WItIt, advised that he was continuing to work with the Watershed District to develop the
<br />76
<br />stormwater management system that would meet the, project's requirements on site through rain
<br />77
<br />giaridens and other options, to enhance the site, and to alleviate water damage issues.
<br />718
<br />Pub[ic Comment
<br />7 99
<br />john Eitsinger, Rosewood Village Condominiums
<br />8 0
<br />Mr. Eitsinger advised that he had a different perception of the neighborhood meeting, correcting
<br />81
<br />that those in attendance were not renters, but owners of the adjacent condominiums. Mr.
<br />8,2
<br />Eitsinger opined that the majority were supportive of the proposed sprucing up of the existing
<br />8,3
<br />buildings, and" were supportive of anything that', improved the housing situation in Roseville. Ms.
<br />84
<br />Eitsinger further opined that he was not convinced that there was a need for additional housing in
<br />8 5
<br />olsieville, Mr, Eitsinger expressed concerns related to traffic on the frontage road, specifically at
<br />80
<br />the curve on the, northwest side, and evidence of already dangerous blind spot speeds, with the
<br />8 7
<br />proposed access point for this project onnl . ly further degenerating that situation. Mr. Eitsinger
<br />8 8
<br />advised that he was supportive of the new bluilding, provided the existing buffer remained or was
<br />89,
<br />enhanced between his property and the subject property.
<br />9,10
<br />Delde Goodwin., 2206 Haddington Road (so,uth�/west of parcel)
<br />91
<br />Ms, Goodwin spoke in support of rehabilitation of the five (5) existing buildings; however, 'was not
<br />92
<br />supportive of addling a new building, and echoed concerns about the proposed access to the new
<br />9 3
<br />building expressed by the previous speaker.
<br />Ms. Goodwin provided extensive demogra�ph�ic information she'd researched with the City's Police
<br />Department on crime statistics and comparisons between 2006 and 2007, alleging that the
<br />increase was due to the Har Mar Apartments. Ms.. Goodwin made comparisons between the Har
<br />Mar, Apartments and Rosewood Village crime statistics, and expressed grave concern regarding
<br />the existing and ongoing major crime me in that small geographic section Roseville, Ms. Goodwin
<br />calculated that at. Rosewood Village there was one pollice call for every nine people in 2007
<br />compared to Har Mar Apartments showing police callus almost four (4) times that many, with only
<br />half as many tenants, and with on-site management.,
<br />
|