Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-19-2005 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting January 19, 2005 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m., January 19, 2005. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Miller, Zwirn, Hegland, Scotch, Meehlhause, and Stevenson Members Absent: None. Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson Planning Associate Prososki ________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Discussion of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Mounds View Golf Course 2 _______________________________________________________________________ 3. Approve Minutes a. December 15, 2004 MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Miller. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for December 15, 2004 as Presented. Ayes –6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission January 19, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 5. Discuss Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Which Would Change the Land Use Designation of the Bridges of Mounds View Golf Course from Outdoor Sport/Recreation and Passive Open Space to Office Park. Community Development Director Ericson stated that the City Council authorized a rezoning of the Bridges site in October of 2003 from Public Facilities (PF) to Industrial (I-1). Minnesota Statutes, as articulated in the MN Land Planning Act, requires that the zoning of a property be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, so it becomes necessary to amend the Comprehensive Plan to reflect the anticipated future land use of the site, which is currently being proposed as an Office (OFC) designation. While other designations may be consistent, such as Light Industrial Planned Unit Development (LI-PUD) or simply a Light Industrial (LI) designation, either of which could accommodate the proposed corporate office complex, it has been determined that an OFC designation would most closely correlate with a planned corporate office complex. Director Ericson stated that the Planning Commission would hold a public hearing on February 2, 2005 to consider the proposed designation for the site, forwarding the recommendation back to the City Council for final approval. He stated that the City Council has opted to forward the amendment directly to the Met Council prior to Council approval, which would provide the City Council with an opportunity to accept or reject the amendment after sufficient time has passed to assess the current redevelopment proposal or any subsequent proposal. Director Ericson stated that RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. has prepared the Met Council amendment application of which the Planning Commission was given a copy. Director Ericson also provided the Planning Commission with the City Council’s resolution authorizing the amendment application. Director Ericson stated that once the amendment is approved and after redevelopment takes place, further text amendments would be necessary to remove references to a city golf course, adjust acreage totals, and amend other maps or exhibits, a list of which he provided to the Planning Commission. Director Ericson stated that no action would be taken on this item tonight other than to discuss it, and that action on the resolution would be taken at the next Planning Commission meeting. Chair Stevenson stated that the reason for breaking up the golf course is for an entire development, and he would hate to see the designation of PUD not being part of the zoning. He asked why a mixed use PUD designation couldn’t be used. He stated that in the event Medtronic went away, he wanted to have the right designation for the property. Director Ericson explained that the problem with the Mounds View PUD designation is that some component of that mixed use would entail residential, and they didn’t want to send the message that they were looking for residential in that area, given the surrounding land uses in Blaine and the proximity of the two major freeways. He stated that light industrial might send Mounds View Planning Commission January 19, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ the message of something in the line of a truck terminal, which would be more intensive than an office complex. Chair Stevenson mentioned a 400-500 condominium unit, and they would possibly have to rezone if a big developer wanted to come in. He stated his concern over breaking up the golf course for smaller projects. Director Ericson stated that the City would not be selling the holes one by one, and they are in charge of the property. He stated that the City wouldn’t be breaking up the golf course for a 25,000 square foot office building, for instance. Commissioner Hegland asked if this designation would in any way impact the tax status of the property. Director Ericson stated that it would not; the County will assess the property based on what it is. He stated if Medtronic were to construct a corporate office complex, it would be assessed at a commercial office designation. He stated that it’s a tax exempt property at this point and is not generating any taxes. Chair Stevenson stated that whoever comes in there would be paying taxes after it’s developed, and Director Ericson stated that that was correct. Commissioner Zwirn asked whether Medtronic had asked the City to provide tax incentives. Director Ericson stated that Medtronic will be seeking financial assistance for the project. He stated that there would be a base tax value of the property that would reflect what its current value is. He stated that the value of their development would be captured within a new TIF district. He stated that the City would still derive the benefit of that base, and that could be $9 million. He stated that the base could be negotiated at whatever the County determines the true market value of the land is, so the various taxing jurisdictions would capture the initial base land value of the project with the excess being available for TIF. He stated that depending on what is negotiated, 90 percent of that could be provided back to the developer, with the City retaining 10 percent for its administration costs. He stated that it would be their intent to get the project fully funded and then repaid, and then back on the tax rolls as soon as possible. Director Ericson stated that Mayor Marty indicated that for this to work for the community, it has to make sense today, not 25 years from now, and that the City of Mounds View cannot continue to shoulder the type of tax increases that there have been the past several years. Commissioner Zwirn stated that what he understood Director Ericson was saying was that right now there is a valuation placed on the land, and there is a tax base that is created as a result of that valuation, and that anything that Medtronic would do to improve that is negotiable as far as tax base goes. He asked if they could negotiate something out 10-15 years from now and delay the taxes on that. Mounds View Planning Commission January 19, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson stated that that was not quite correct, that there would be taxes paid. He stated that how they would finance the development or help address their costs would be to create a TIF District. He stated that Medtronic would pay all the taxes that would be due were it not in the District. He stated that part of that would be captured, and the City could provide that back to the developer, keep part of it, and part of that goes back to the General Fund. He stated that Medtronic would always be paying taxes. Commissioner Zwirn asked if Medtronic had made statements during negotiations that they were asking for assistance, and if they had asked for a rebate of, for example, 90 or 95 percent of that tax base. He asked if the City of Mounds View would still get that 5 percent increase, but 95 percent of it would be waived or put back into construction costs. Director Ericson stated that the TIF advisors and financial advisors are running some numbers for them so that they know what they are asking for and what impact it has on the development. He stated that there were a number of scenarios on the table, and while nothing has been determined, it is likely that there will be tax increment financing assistance. He stated that the base value and the value of the project will depend in part on how the County assesses both. He stated that the County has a vested interest in maximizing the potential because they get a portion of the tax bill, as does the school district. Chair Stevenson stated that he was starting to agree with the Office designation, but that he was a little confused on where they were going with this Comprehensive Plan Amendment regarding the light industrial. Director Ericson stated that the reason why the site was zoned light industrial is that there weren’t a lot of choices for zoning. He stated that offices are an allowed use within an industrial setting. Commissioner Zwirn stated he had heard the words “campus” and “training facility” used. He asked whether Medtronic was going to be using this property as light industrial and whether there would be shipping and receiving, or just exactly what was going to be taking place. Director Ericson stated that it was his understanding that there would be little to no manufacturing, and that it would be strictly office space with minimal shipping and receiving. He stated there would be minor research lab areas and development areas. Chair Stevenson asked if research and development and labs were allowed in an OFC, and Director Ericson responded that they were. Commissioner Zwirn asked if the light industrial PUD designation would afford Medtronic more flexibility for any plans that they may have. Director Ericson stated that such a designation would not afford the end user any additional flexibility. He stated that the designation is a guide, and it’s meant to be somewhat broad. He stated that this property was already rezoned back in 2003, and now they are going to make a Mounds View Planning Commission January 19, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ Comprehensive Plan Amendment consistent with that zoning. He stated that given the nature of the corporate office climate and the magnitude of the development, this would become a PUD, so the way the Code was drafted, it would have to be rezoned to PUD, which would then allow for more flexibility in design and site planning. He stated that Zoning is really the tool that effectuates the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Stevenson asked what direction they were looking for this evening. Director Ericson stated that they were not looking for any action this evening; but they were simply looking for feedback. Commissioner Miller stated that she hoped they were going to do something with 35W and Highway 10, because right now where Highway 10 comes into 35W, it is difficult trying to get onto of County Road I, or even coming from County Road I to go north on 35. Director Ericson stated that that is a big concern for everyone, as it isn’t functioning as best it can. He stated that the Met Council recently adopted their Transportation Improvement Plan through 2020, and there didn’t seem to be any improvements slated for the 35W corridor. He stated that three different groups are looking at this, and that the Governor is now on board supporting improvements to 35W, County Road J, and the Lake/J interchange. He stated that MnDOT has expanded their study to up County Road J. Chair Stevenson stated that they were on board with this designation, whether it stays a golf course or not. Director Ericson stated that changing the designation doesn’t force the City’s hand, and they don’t have to redevelop it. He stated that there are a number of areas in the city where the existing land use isn’t consistent with the future land use. _____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Next Planning Commission Meeting: February 2, 2005 ______________________________________________________________________________ 9. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Mounds View Planning Commission January 19, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Sheree Theobald TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.