Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-04-2005 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING AGENDA NEW BRIGHTON CITY HALL Monday, November 14, 2005 6:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: President Marty, Vice President Stigney, Commissioner Flaherty, Commissioner Gunn, Commissioner Thomas 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. PUBLIC INPUT: Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. October 24, 2005 EDA Minutes 6. CONSENT AGENDA 7. EDA BUSINESS A. Continuation of a Joint Meeting Between the EDA and the Economic Development Commission (EDC) to Address TIF Goals and TIF Funding Priorities B. Resolution 05-EDA-210 Authorizing the Demolition of 7861 Groveland Road 8. REPORTS 9. NEXT EDA MEETING: Monday, November 28, 2005 @ 630pm 10. ADJOURNMENT PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW EDA 1 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2 RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3 4 Regular Meeting 5 October 24, 2005 6 New Brighton City Hall 7 803 Old Highway 8, New Brighton, MN 55112 8 6:34 P.M. 9 10 11 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER 12 13 2. ROLL CALL: President Marty (arrived at 7:02 p.m.), Vice-President Stigney, 14 Commissioner Gunn, Commissioner Flaherty, and Commissioner Thomas. 15 16 NOT PRESENT: None. 17 18 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 19 20 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Flaherty. To Approve the October 24, 2005 Agenda as presented. 21 22 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 23 24 4. PUBLIC INPUT 25 26 None. 27 28 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 29 30 A. EDA Minutes of August 22, 2005 31 32 Vice President Stigney requested a correction on Page 18, Line 744, to read: “liability limit of 33 $200,0000.” 34 35 MOTION/SECOND: Flaherty/Stigney. To Approve the August 22, 2005 Minutes as amended. 36 37 Ayes –4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 38 39 6. CONSENT AGENDA 40 41 None. 42 43 Mounds View EDA October 24, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 2 7. EDA BUSINESS 44 45 A. Presentation by Wanda Hart, Coldwell Banker, re: Laport Meadow 46 Residential Project 47 48 Economic Development Coordinator Backman reviewed that Skyline Builders, Inc. has been 49 considering a potential residential project in the Laport Meadows area. At the September 12, 50 2005 Mounds View EDA meeting, Cheryl Stinski of Skyline Builders and Wander Hart of 51 Coldwell Banker discussed a proposed residential project in the Laport Meadows area, east of 52 Long Lake Road. At that meeting, Jeff Sweitzer, architect with Sharratt Design Company, 53 presented several concept plans of what the project could look like. The EDA asked the 54 developer to revise the concept plans to reduce density and have further discussion with the land 55 owners. 56 57 Wanda Hart, Coldwell Banker Burnet, reported that they contacted the 11 parties involved in this 58 potential project, some are landowners and homeowners, some are just homeowners, and some 59 just landowners. Of the 11 contacted, one is a definite ‘no’ to the entire project and the others are 60 in line with the project and thinking about it. She stated the exciting part is that their new idea 61 for the area puts less pressure on Long Lake Road so those homeowners can participate or not. 62 63 Jeff Sweitzer, Sharratt Design Company, thanked the EDA for allowing them to present their 64 new proposal tonight. He displayed a concept plan which is predicated on the idea there are 65 certain property owners who are yes, some are no, and some are maybe. He used a map to point 66 out the properties that do not want to participate and noted this plan allows people to be in or out 67 of the project, or added at a later date. It also responds to the Rice Creek Watershed District 68 indication there is a high water table on the western edge. He noted the location of a green 69 backyard buffer to address that issue, resulting in a meandering pathway between two round-70 abouts which will slow down traffic and designate it possibly as its own neighborhood. 71 72 Mr. Sweitzer noted this concept is predicated on the compost site moving and a senior housing 73 project located to the north. In addition, they have reduced the number of units so it is not 74 invasive on the wetland or neighborhood. He pointed out the location of the Lund property, 75 which may want to be part of the overall development if it comes to pass. 76 77 Mr. Sweitzer placed an overlay on the concept plan which depicted the location of the existing 78 homes. He noted the trail meanders through an evergreen trail, connecting the senior area to the 79 picnic area. The first plan had a pedestrian path out to a fishing pier, which is now more of an 80 internal amenity even though it would be open to all. He emphasized that this new concept is 81 more respectful of the current land owners and their decision to participate or not. 82 83 Commissioner Thomas pointed out that it would require them to subdivide and sell part of their 84 property. Mr. Sweitzer stated that is correct and they have addressed that issue with the property 85 Mounds View EDA October 24, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 3 owners who have agreed to sell the back half of their property. 86 87 Vice President Stigney asked about the difference in the number of houses. 88 89 Mr. Sweitzer reviewed there are 30 single-family homes with Concept A and this concept has 28 90 single-family homes. The 28 homes includes an 8-unit condo building and 3-units of row 91 townhouses. 92 93 Economic Development Coordinator Backman advised that Concept A had a total of 124 units 94 and the revised concept now shows 84 units, so the number has been cut by one-third. 95 96 Commissioner Flaherty stated this concept is more attractive to him than Concept A due to the 97 lower density. He noted the two senior buildings at 42 units each with a nice sculpture garden. 98 He asked about the maintenance of the senior condo area. 99 100 Mr. Sweitzer stated that question could be answered by Cheryl Stinski of Skyline Builders who is 101 the developer but unable to attend tonight. 102 103 Ms. Hart stated it would be similar to any other condo association with fees that are competitive 104 to other associations. The senior condos would be owner occupied. 105 106 Economic Development Coordinator Backman asked about the project market value. 107 108 Ms. Hart stated they have not reviewed those numbers in depth but the condos will be in the area 109 of $200,000 and up. The private custom residential homes will be similar to or higher in dollar 110 value than the Hidden Hollow homes off County Road H2. 111 112 Vice President Stigney stated some of the Hidden Hollow homes are over $600,000. 113 114 Economic Development Coordinator Backman stated these homes will probably be in the range 115 of $350,000 to $500,000. 116 117 Ms. Hart concurred and explained they have not reviewed the numbers in detail because they do 118 not yet know how much land is available due to the wetland area. She pointed out three home 119 sites to the southeast of the wetland that may be of a higher value. 120 121 Commissioner Flaherty asked about access to the trail. Mr. Sweitzer pointed out the access 122 locations on the concept plan including the boardwalk through the wetland area. 123 124 Commissioner Gunn stated she finds this plan to be very attractive, much less intrusive, and 125 unique. She noted it blends in well and does not take over. 126 Mounds View EDA October 24, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 4 127 Commissioner Thomas asked about arrangements for the compost site and parking for the condo 128 and senior housing area. 129 130 Economic Development Coordinator Backman stated the relocation of the compost site is a 131 policy decision that the EDA will have to make. He stated with this concept plan, he likes the 132 arrangement, noting three solid areas for “selling points”: 1) It does not add additional roads 133 onto Long Lake Road and uses existing right-of-way and roads, which will be attractive to the 134 County as well. 2) It has a lower density and allows for phases in the project. 3) It uses some of 135 the existing infrastructure and builds on existing infrastructure so the City does not have to 136 “recreate the wheel” or relocate utility lines. 137 138 With regard to the location of the compost site, Public Works Director Lee stated that is a policy 139 decision of the Council or EDA about what is the highest and best use for this land. He stated 140 staff could initiate discussions with Ramsey County about the long-range goals for the compost 141 collection site and if they would consider more of a regional compost site. 142 143 Economic Development Coordinator Backman reviewed that the City Survey indicated a 144 majority want to retain a compost site in Mounds View but some indicated a willingness to take 145 composting material to Shoreview or Arden Hills. He stated residents could be asked what 146 distance they would be willing to drive to an alternate site. 147 148 Commissioner Thomas stated she loves this revised plan which echoes more of what the EDA 149 had in mind. She noted the next step is the EDA’s, to find another location. She stated it is her 150 opinion there should be a location found within the City and she is not comfortable with locating 151 it in the north corner at this time. She stated this is an amenity the City is providing and while it 152 will never be the highest and best use of any property, it is important to her to keep providing this 153 service. She stated she does not want to get in a bind by approving this now and then trying to 154 find an alternate compost site. She reiterated this is the responsibility of the City, Council, and 155 staff, and she is not willing to give up providing that service to the residents. 156 157 Commissioner Gunn stated she assumes this plan can be done in phases to start with the homes 158 first until the alternate compost site is relocated. She pointed out that residents have been asking 159 for senior condos and this plan addresses that need. 160 161 Vice President Stigney agreed that the compost issue definitely needs to be looked at and he 162 wants to know what the developer could do if the compost site is shifted to the north. He asked 163 if this development could encompass that use. 164 165 Mr. Sweitzer stated they have not looked at that option but can do so. 166 167 Economic Development Coordinator Backman advised that the compost area covers about one 168 Mounds View EDA October 24, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 5 acre of the 9-acre site. He noted there are issues with the links and pointed out that if the 169 compost site moves to the north, it becomes more visible so buffering would have to be 170 addressed, or they may need to forego one of the buildings. 171 172 Mr. Sweitzer pointed out the location of a wetland area to the north, which may be an issue in 173 placing a compost site to the north because it may impact the water quality. He explained that he 174 does not have that expertise so a consultant would have to become involved to determine the 175 impacts to the wetland. 176 177 Ms. Hart stated she has walked the site and the area on the north end is very narrow. She felt a 178 compost site would have to come farther down and would end up impacting the location they 179 propose for the northern senior condo building. She stated it is her personal opinion that would 180 not be a good location because it is not large enough and would impact the wetland. 181 182 Commissioner Flaherty stated the developer would be hard pressed to get approval from the EDA 183 without some compromise on the compost site by the developers. He stated the compost site 184 needs to be retained in some way and in some location within Mounds View. 185 186 Mr. Sweitzer advised that all senior condo parking would be located in a heated underground lot. 187 Surface parking would be created for visitors. 188 189 B. Resolution 05-EDA-210 Authorizing the Laport Meadow Wetland 190 Delineation Study 191 192 Economic Development Coordinator Backman used a map to identify the subject area bounded 193 by Highway 10, Long Lake Road, and what would be Laport Drive. He noted the mixed 194 ownership pattern and explained the City owns or controls portions of the area and private 195 landowners the rest. He advised that over eight of the parcels in the Laport Meadows area are 196 currently vacant. 197 198 Economic Development Coordinator Backman advised that staff requested written proposals and 199 received two from qualified firms specializing in wetland sciences to conduct a wetland 200 delineation study of the Laport Meadows area. The proposals ranged in cost from $2,323 to 201 $2,660 with SEH submitting the lowest bid. 202 203 Economic Development Coordinator Backman stated staff recommends the HRA adopt the draft 204 resolution, which authorizes the consulting firm of SEH, Inc. to conduct a wetland delineation 205 study of the Laport Meadows area at a cost not to exceed $2,500. 206 207 President Marty arrived at 7:02 p.m. 208 209 Commissioner Flaherty stated per the previous discussion related to the compost site, he would 210 Mounds View EDA October 24, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 6 like to wait until the EDA sees an alternative to relocate the compost site before authorizing the 211 delineation study. He stated he would like to have the developers, City staff, and Ramsey County 212 come up with an alternative to the compost site prior to moving ahead with a delineation. 213 214 Economic Development Coordinator Backman explained that this information would be useful 215 for the whole area, about 40 acres, and would not address a specific concept plan. This 216 information will pertain to the location of the wetlands. He explained that as with the Hidden 217 Hollow soil borings, the delineation will get information to determine if the soils are appropriate 218 for development. 219 220 Economic Development Coordinator Backman pointed out that the weather is starting to change 221 so the “window” to do delineations is coming to a close. If the delineation is done over the 222 winter, the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) will look at that information differently. He 223 stated the delineation will indicate where the wetland area is located and encouraged the EDA to 224 consider this request. In addition it would provide guidance to the developer since if the wetland 225 is larger, it will impact where the homes, development, and roads are located. 226 227 Commissioner Thomas noted the concept plan presented tonight is not a final plan and a 228 delineation plan would be beneficial for the City to know what can be done with the concept 229 plan. She stated the plan reviewed tonight can be workable and the EDA’s goals are to work 230 with this property. She stated she is comfortable with considering this action tonight. 231 232 Commissioner Gunn stated her agreement. 233 234 Commissioner Flaherty asked how long is the delineation information good. Economic 235 Development Coordinator Backman indicated three years. 236 237 Barbara Haake, 3024 County Road I, stated she is a member of the RCWD, which spent $95,000 238 to look at the Greenfield Park area. To save money, she suggested City staff approach the 239 RCWD to get their engineering information which was done in the last two years. She advised 240 that the RCWD will also do this kind of work without a high charge. 241 242 President Marty suggested staff contact the RCWD to see if they have reviewed that area. 243 244 Economic Development Coordinator Backman advised a hydrology report was done by Peterson 245 Environmental in 2000 but too much time has elapsed to use that information. 246 247 Ms. Hart stated she and Mr. Sweitzer met with the RCWD and learned they did not have 248 information on this property. 249 250 MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Gunn. To waive the reading and adopt Resolution 05-EDA-210 251 Authorizing the Laport Meadow Wetland Delineation Study. 252 Mounds View EDA October 24, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 7 253 Commissioner Flaherty stated he is still against proceeding with this study just for the sake of 254 having information. He indicated he would prefer doing it once there is a concrete plan that will 255 move forward. 256 257 Commissioner Gunn stated having this information will help the developer to come up with a 258 plan that is beyond the concept stage. 259 260 President Marty asked if there is a possibility that the RCWD could assist with this study for a 261 lower cost. He noted that RCWD would want to review this area anyway and using them may 262 cut out a step. 263 264 Economic Development Coordinator Backman stated the RCWD usually has engineers that they 265 work with and he believes this is a competitive price. He stated RCWD could provide 266 information on the 100- and 500-year flood planes but this study will be to delineate the wetland 267 on the site. 268 269 President Marty asked if this cost would be built into the development cost so the City is 270 reimbursed. Economic Development Coordinator Backman stated when working with Procraft 271 Homes there was a predevelopment agreement. With this project, the City does not have a 272 predevelopment agreement but that will occur and he believes it is a reasonable cost for which 273 the EDA could be reimbursed. 274 275 Ayes – 4 Nays – 1 (Flaherty) Motion carried. 276 277 8. REPORTS 278 279 None. 280 281 9. NEXT EDA MEETING: Monday, November 14, 2005 at 6 p.m. (New Brighton City 282 Hall). 283 284 10. ADJOURNMENT 285 286 President Marty adjourned the meeting at 7:12 p.m. 287 288 Respectfully submitted, 289 290 291 Recorded and transcribed by: 292 Carla Wirth 293 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 294