12-03-2013 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 03, 2013 Page 5 of 9 MOTION PASSES 4-0 Council Member Nelson asked that Item 9 be moved ahead to accommodate guests present. Mayor Pearson accommodated his request. The meeting was recessed at 9:07pm. The meeting was reconvened at 9:13pm. ITEM 9: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND EAGLE POINT BUSINESS PARK PUD AMENDMENT - 33.029.21.42.0013; RES. NO. 2013-103 Planning Director Klatt provided overview of PUD amendment request. Request is basically bringing property in line with current PUD rules. Proposal is for changing the PUD to allow a school in the Eagle Point Business Park. Staff originally suggested approval. Planning Commission recommended denying request. Commission is concerned about loss of tax revenue. It also did not believe that site is appropriate for a school. It was their opinion that there would be better sites. Council Member Bloyer asked for clarification on resolution findings 5(a), (b), and (c). He asked if Planning Commission was interested in the economic loss during the Section 32/33 detachments. Director Kristine Carr introduced Special Education Director Dan Naidicz. He spoke about the school in further detail. Current facilities do not meet the needs. Another reason for location is to centralize the facility in the area. Mr. Bloyer asked about the capacity/enrollment. Estimated to be 60-70 students initially. Capability to grow to 150 students. Council Member Reeves asked about the Blaine location. Mr. Naidicz explained the geography. Mr. Bloyer asked about traffic impact. Steve Erickson explained about 20 buses. Up to school district discretion. Not many visitors during the day. Plan allows for 2 access points. Bremer bank (neighbor) concerned about traffic impacting their facility during the day. It was noted that the school district was willing to work with the neighboring properties on these issues. ISD 916 would buy land and building. Member schools would pay debt. Mr. Erickson pointed out that because this is a new type of facility, construction would not begin for about 2 years. District wants to make sure that the plan is workable. Final plan would either meet or exceed requirements. Expect to bring plans to Council in about 18 months. Currently have 180 days option to purchase. Close no later than April 2016. Mr. Bloyer asked about the length of the CUP. Mr. Klatt explained that there would be a year for final plan brought back under code. Mr. Reeves asked about number of tax loss. Mr. Klatt explained that the initial number was provided by Assessor, but in fact number is actually much lower when only city portion is considered. City Attorney Snyder noted that courts have limited CUP determinations to strict adherence to ordinance. Tax revenue is not in there and could not be relied upon if litigated. City Administrator Zuleger noted that staff is working on service agreement similar to what is in place for Blaine facility. Mayor Pearson said his opinion is that that Planning Commission veered from their purpose in using tax revenue loss. The school would also bring 60-100 good paying jobs to area. Council Member Nelson asked about WAC/SAC charges. Mr. Zuleger explained that there are formulas for these types of facilities. The property has been vacant since 1999. Connect to city water/sewer by time school is built. The original staff recommendation for approval was discussed. Mr. Klatt noted that the new findings and new resolution for the CUP would be brought back to Council if approved. Messrs. Nelson and Bloyer want a longer time for the CUP - 24-36 months.