09-21-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ would be looped through the system to provide fresh water. He added the standard process is to bore under Highway 10, which is the conventional means to provide utilities without disrupting traffic. An informal cost study was done regarding the feasibility of providing these utilities and the City felt it was beneficial to provide utilities to the site. Commissioner Hegland asked what is the return on investment. Commissioner Scotch referenced Director Ericson’s comments regarding the Commission’s responsibility to review just the plan issues and asked if the Commission is supposed to discuss money or investments. Commissioner Hegland stated he was asking how the analysis was done, not about dollars. Commissioner Scotch stated the project came before the Commission without a PUD and now is back for approval with a PUD. She added the Commission needs to know what dollars are being generated for the City. Director Ericson replied a feasibility report would be done; it is part of the plan submittal. He noted the role of the Commission is to review planning activities, not financial matters. Commissioner Scotch stated she is disappointed because previous discussions included some type of park project but now it is not possible because of wetlands. Director Ericson responded that a feasibility study would be necessary to assess the viability of installing a trailway; he did not suggest such an improvement would not be possible. Acting Chair Miller opened the cases for public comment at 8:49 p.m. Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, stated he was on the City Council as Mayor in the 1980s. He referenced the Met Council and Land Act roles. He added the Commission has a fiduciary mission that approved projects will be cost efficient. Barb Haake, 3024 County Road I, asked how many acres encompasses phase 1 with the parking lot. She indicated the development agreement signed on August 31 does not include a phase 2 or 3. There is $150,000 dedicated to the SYSCO Outlot for trails or other improvements, will the rest of the $865,000 park dedication fees go to the City for other uses. She asked about the traffic study by AUAR, indicating nothing specifies what happens with traffic through the City. She asked if, when rezoning, the Commission would hold a public hearing for comments. Director Ericson replied phase 1 is 27.77 acres of land. He stated nothing prohibits the City from spending all $865,000 in park dedication fees on the SYSCO Outlot area. He noted the City Code does not require the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing, and that it is scheduled for the October 10 City Council meeting. Mr. McCarty stated the documents have changed in so many ways. He requested clarification regarding sanitary sewer and water service, noting he is unaware of any solid engineering feasibility study or estimate to extend under Highway 10. He added he would be more