Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/23/1999 EDAC MinutesAPPROVED CITY OF LINO LAKES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES DATE: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Johnson, B. Wessel, J. Milbauer, H. Juni, D. Gorowsky, R. Jensen, P. Rickaby, F. Chase, F. Johnson MEMBERS ABSENT: G. Rehbein, J. Schwartz, J. Bergeson OTHER PRESENT: M. Divine, D. Carlson, K. Sullivan, L. Waite Smith FIVE YEAR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN Members reviewed the draft five-year plan and made suggestions including:  Tables and charts that explain projected C/I revenues as well as revenues to date  Reviewing C/I sites for where infrastructure is already in place versus where the city would need to invest before development could occur  A definitions page that explains the differences in zoning to act as a common frame of reference for all to use.  Reversing goals 1 and 2  Incorporate environmental plan in overall economic development plan  Define city resources in terms of public investment, staff time, etc.  Elaborate on the city’s direction, quality of development and consistency Mr. Wessel said he would present the completed plan to the city council. Mr. Johnson said it was important to look at an economic development plan in relation to the comprehensive plan. Mr. Gorowsky noted that an important issue for EDAC to look at is the existing tax base compared to what is projected, and whether enough commercial land is available to meet projected goals. EDAC should consider how much commercial is needed to satisfy the needs of the residential development. The regional park presents a challenge, and the city needs to be realistic about what it can’t accommodate and make the most of its limited resources. Mr. Milbauer stated that this plan would be a goal, and that goal is to focus on serving the needs of the locals, to keep them shopping at home rather than taking their money outside the city. Mr. Gorowsky stated he believes the focus for C/I development has changed since EDAC began. Mr. Chase said a group needs to act as a watchdog committee over the comprehensive plan since housing development directs commercial development. Ms. Carlson noted that Springsted, the city’s bond consultant, presented a report that showed an imbalance and the city needs to concentrate on higher value housing. Ms. Sullivan stated that it must be recognized that this report’s goals were not the same as the comprehensive planning goals. Ms. Carlson said she would want a guide for the future from Springsted before voting on a comprehensive plan. Mr. Wessel said that the goal was to have 15% C/I market value by 2010, which averages out to approximately $7-8 million per year. Mr. B. Johnson pointed out that to date, the commercial development was up to the developers, and the city needed to become more proactive. Mr. Wessel stated that staff used criteria to evaluate projects. Mr. Jensen said a strong comprehensive plan and zoning code was essential to quality development. Ms. Carlson asked how staff helps small businesses that ask for assistance. Ms. Divine explained that in the case of new business, staff reviews projects, makes recommendations, and guides them through the approvals process, but does not offer them assistance with planning their building. Mr. F. Johnson noted that if a prospect can’t afford an architect, it can’t afford to build. Action: Mr. Milbauer moved to direct staff to incorporate the discussed changes to the five year plan into the draft and bring to the Dec. 2 EDAC meeting for further review. Mr. F. Johnson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. PLANNING AND FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEES Mr. Gorowsky stated that there was unanimous support for these committees at the last EDAC meeting. Mr. Chase said each committee will decide the direction it wants to take. The regular EDAC meetings will serve as a clearinghouse for the subcommittees. Ms. Sullivan noted that the city council was not aware of EDAC’s intent and if the council has specific feelings toward public investment, EDAC should be aware of this. Friday reports can keep the council advised on the direction of EDAC. Members discussed meeting dates and concluded that Planning would meet on Nov. 30, Dec. 21, and Jan. 11. Finance will meet on Dec. 14, Jan. 4 and Jan. 25. Mr. B. Johnson requested that Jeff Smyser, city planner, attend the first planning meeting. Action: Mr. Milbauer moved to approve the meeting dates. Mr. F. Johnson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Divine said she would make schedules and agendas and fax to members. ONE YEAR ACTION PLAN Action: Mr. Milbauer moved to table the action plan until members had a chance to review it. Mr. Gorowsky seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. WAGE AND JOB POLICIES Discussion continued regarding use of incentives. Mr. Jensen gave a summary of other Anoka County cities use of incentives. Ms. Sullivan said the League of Minnesota Cities was in the midst of policy setting and this was an issue. Ms. Carlson said she believed two camps within the city existed on using subsidies and she believes she does not have a mandate to address the subsidy issue. She suggested a public meeting so citizens can work together on formulating criteria for wages and jobs. Mr. Gorowsky noted that most citizens don’t have an interest in TIF beyond how C/I improves taxes. Mr. Jensen agreed that TIF is hard to explain, and most issues arise when it is used for commercial development and it can be argued it creates unfair competition. Mr. Jensen stated the city has not abused TIF, but redevelopment and retail competition can create issues. OTHER ISSUES Mr. Wessel updated EDAC on McDonald’s development. The project will be moved to spring of 2000, which will allow the potential for the road extension to become a public improvement. A single developer is possible for the entire shopping center site. Action: Mr. Milbauer moved to adjourn. Mr. Juni seconded the motion. Meeting adjourned, 8:35 a.m.