Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/03/2000 EDAC MinutesAPPROVED CITY OF LINO LAKES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES DATE: Thursday, August 3, 2000 MEMBERS PRESENT: F. Chase, H. Juni, T. Vacha, J. Schwartz, J. Milbauer, R. Jensen MEMBERS ABSENT: M. Haselman, D. Gorowsky, B. Rehbein OTHERS PRESENT: M. Divine, D. Carlson, B. Johnson, B. Wessel, J. Smyser GENERAL/MINUTES Ms. Schwartz moved to approve minutes of July 13, 2000. Mr. Juni seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. APOLLO BUSINESS CENTER UPDATES Ms. Divine updated the committee on new projects, including Marmon/Keystone, Twin City Fab, Inc., which are going through the approvals process, and on two potential businesses interested in the site adjoining Jon Street. The city’s new outside storage ordinance prohibits this parcel from having outside storage. Both prospects are requesting it. Ms. Schwartz questioned if the parcel could be subdivided so the outside storage site did not abut Jon Street. Staff will look into it. TOWN CENTER DESIGN STANDARDS Mr. Wessel updated the board on the schedule of approvals for the Town Center design standards. Staff will be requesting a recommendation from the council to approve the standards in concept on Aug. 28 to be able to move forward on the Livable Communities grant application for funds to implement the Village project. Ms. Divine explained the city scored very high on the first cut of the application project, but the Livable Communities committee will be looking for evidence that the city had its regulatory process in place and that the project could move forward with a grant award. Mr. Wessel said staff is looking to EDAC for its endorsement of the direction of the design standards. Ms. Divine explained that she and Mr. Smyser had made revisions in the design standards, including clarification of what will be required and what is recommended. Changes include adding the Lake Drive properties in The Village to the Highway Commercial area, and also changing the specific boundaries for different uses to flexible boundaries. Staff recommendation is that the standards move forward in ordinance form to ensure the city’s vision. Mr. Smyser completed a chart that shows how current zoning standards compare to the new ones. Mr. Milbauer asked about requiring parking behind stores so that retailers must have double entries. He is concerned about the security aspects. Mr. Smyser explained parking behind with a main entrance on the street is fundamental to the standards. The standards do not mandate that the retailer use the back entrance. Staff said retailers could close their back entrance if they wanted. Mr. Chase said there must be flexibility. Today we may think we know what we want, but if it doesn’t work, the city needs to be flexible. Ms. Divine pointed out which retail areas in the plan are affected by the double entrances. Mr. Jensen said the standards are creating an environment. Ms. Divine discussed the issues regarding the YMCA as an integral part of the Village, and how it would completely undo the purpose of the Village if they put the parking in front. While it is a design challenge, it is essential the main entrance be on the street. Mr. Jensen noted Coon Rapids community center has two entrances. Mr. Milbauer asked what the grant money would be for. It will be for the phase one infrastructure. Mr. Johnson asked how Mr. Fefercorn responded to the design standards. Ms. Divine said he had made detailed comments, which were considered while making revisions, but he is in favor of standards. Ms. Schwartz questioned that if the developer could not develop without the grant, didn’t it mean that the design standards are cost prohibitive? Ms. Divine responded that was the case because the Tagg family has set its price and it is not feasible to build housing at that price. Most of these developments do have some public money involved. If the city does not get the grant, some other public money will be needed or the land will sit there for awhile, which could mean that the market is dictating the price is too high. Ms. Schwartz that the city is devaluing the land because of the high standards the market cannot bear. Mr. Smyser said the market is doing nothing with it now. It is a risk, but staff believes it is a risk that will lead to higher value in the future. Mr. Milbauer said his bank cost more than he anticipated, but this area was worth the risk. He questioned whether Mr. Fefercorn had the ability to do the project. Ms. Divine said she believed he did. Other developers were also interested. Mr. Milbauer said he feels more comfortable knowing double entrances aren’t required. Staff is requesting that EDAC consider the following endorsement: “endorse the Town Center standards as recommended by staff with the understanding that the city may revise specific requirements in the standards. Signage standards will be temporarily pulled for further review. Such revisions would occur as part of the process for amending the city’s zoning ordinance to include standards for a new Town Center zoning district.” Mr. Smyser said the actual design standards will not be in place until the zoning amendment process is complete, which includes a public hearing. The standards remain a draft until the process is complete. Mr. Milbauer asked how the YMCA would view the standards and what control the city has over the Tagg land. Mr. Smyser said unless the city goes through eminent domain and buys the property, the city cannot require the Taggs to get off their land. Nobody is intending to do that. The Taggs can stay there as long as they want. Ms. Schwartz questioned if the city attorney had explored the issue of inverse condemnation because the city has put restrictions on the land. Mr. Wessel said the city attorney has looked at it. Mr. Chase said it would be hard to prove that because the city has made the land more valuable through its actions. The city is not forcing them into selling or staying. Ms. Schwartz said improvements to the land cannot be considered under the rules of condemnation. Ms. Divine said the land is currently zoned Limited Business and is going to a PDO, which actually has much more flexibility. Ms. Divine said the YMCA likes the concept and the goal, but they don’t want it to cost more than the standard YMCA. They don’t like two entries. The architect doing some spec work thought the double entry was workable. The city has made a significant contribution, the city should be able to ask for this. Mr. Jensen moved to pass the endorsement. Mr. Juni seconded the motion. Ms. Schwartz reiterated her concern that these standards could limit the market for the land and thus devalue the land. She believes there should be more flexibility that could change on a situational basis. Mr. Jensen said flexibility is good, but the Town Center is supposed to be special, and it is time to make a decision, and there is a price to pay. Eventually we will get what we want. He said he is voting on a concept, not hitching the vote to the Fefercorn plan or the grant. Mr. Chase said all developers are different. This development asks for a special developer and many won’t do it. We are limiting who will do this kind of project. Mr. Smyser said this has more flexibility than a standard ordinance, which creates boring and dysfunctional developments. These standards regulate things that standard ordinances don’t, and don’t regulate many things standards ordinances do. Our current ordinance is a very large document and would create strip malls. Mr. Smyser said the fact that the usage boundaries are flexible would never be considered under standard ordinances. Mr. Johnson said we might have to do trade-offs to get some things we really want. Mr. Chase said it would be good if we say what the intent is, with the development agreement getting to the specifics. Motion passed with Ms. Schwartz voting no. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 a.m.