Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-02-2005 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting February 2, 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. February 2, 2005. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Miller, Zwirn, Meehlhause, and Stevenson Members Absent: Hegland and Scotch Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson and Planning Associate Prososki ________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution 783-05, Recommending 2 Approval of a 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. Consider Resolution 782-05, Recommending Acquisition of 2394 County 4 Road 10, Donut Connection _______________________________________________________________________ 3. Approve Minutes None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda Marcy Winkler, 2372 Laport Drive, stated she was concerned about building another multiple dwelling complex in the Laport Meadows neighborhood. She explained that there are already Mounds View Planning Commission February 2, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ five trailer courts, many apartment buildings, and many townhouses in Mounds View. She expressed her concern regarding her property value going down if another townhouse development would be put in. She added that she has seen owner-occupied townhouses become rentals later on in other areas. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution 783-05, Recommending Approval of a 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 reminded the Commission that this issue was discussed at the Planning Commission meeting on January 19th. He explained the Zoning Code had been recently amended to designate this site as Industrial, consistent with the adjoining properties in the surrounding area. He informed the Commission that Minnesota law requires that the zoning be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, so the next step is to amend the Comprehensive Plan to be consistent with the designated zoning which was recently amended. He further explained that at this point the land use has a split designation of OSP and SRO, and the proposed amendment would reflect an OFC designation. He noted that other potential designations had been discussed at the last meeting. Director Ericson informed the Commission that the City Council directed staff to move forward with this amendment, and after the Planning Commission reviews the matter, it will be forwarded onto the Metropolitan Council for their consideration. Once the Metropolitan Council makes their determination, it would come back to the City Council for final review and approval. He stated that the Planning Commission had been provided with an updated Community Profile and Background, which is essentially the application and package that goes to the Metropolitan Council. He noted that if something were constructed at the site other than a golf course, some changes would need to be made to the Comprehensive Plan. Chair Stevenson mentioned that the reason this would not be designated Light Industrial is because something in the line of a truck terminal could be a potential use, and that might send the wrong message, which was discussed at the January 19th meeting. John Dietrich from RLK explained that on Question No. 5, they had streamlined the list of agencies that would be reviewing the application. He continued by indicating those agencies would include the City of Blaine, Ramsey County, Anoka County, Rice Creek Watershed, the FAA, MnDOT, and the City of Shoreview. He indicated that they would be submitting this application on February 3rd. He stated that the changes they had made to the Community Profile and Background were in italics. He added that the Met Council has seen the AUAR, and they did send a letter back to the City stating that the AUAR is complete. He also added that this review would probably take the full 60-days. He passed out a tentative schedule of projected dates regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process, with April 20, 2005 being the target date for Comprehensive Plan Approval at the Met Council. Mounds View Planning Commission February 2, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Miller noted that on page 1 at the very bottom it says, “parking ramps”. She asked whether it should be “parking ramps” or “parking ramp”. Mr. Dietrich agreed that it should be “parking ramp”, and that he would make that change. Commissioner Miller also noted that the box for “not applicable” was not checked on page 2, Item 6, and she inquired as to whether it should be. Mr. Dietrich confirmed that the box should be checked. Chair Stevenson asked when public input would be taken on this item. Director Ericson replied that this evening’s meeting is a public hearing, and the public had been invited. He noted that he did not receive any phone calls or letters. He informed the Commission that he had a conversation with Sysco, and their only issue was that the transportation system be adequate to handle additional traffic. Mr. Ericson pointed out that there would be another City Council meeting following the Met Council’s approval where the public would have an opportunity for input. Mr. Dietrich mentioned that they anticipate that the Met Council will look at the transportation issue, and that there has been a very thorough transportation study done. He added that other issues of focus are storm water and storm water management. He stated that the Code is very clear on what needs to be done. He added that there is a sanitary sewer interceptor that already bisects a portion of the site, so they have looked at those capacities. Commissioner Miller asked what “Hybrid I” meant on Table 3. Mr. Dietrich explained that there is a plan in the works where Lake Drive, 35W,and County Road J all come together, and that is one of the major elements of the study of the Stakeholders meeting with MnDOT and the regional transportation engineers. He continued by saying that Hybrid talks about possibly building a bridge so that Lake Drive could fly over 35W and then come down for the southbound connection. Director Ericson clarified that the “I” part of that is from I-35W. Mr. Dietrich reassured the Commission that he would put that all on one line to eliminate the confusion. Director Ericson stated that Resolution 783-05 was before them if the Commission felt comfortable with the amendment application. Commissioner Zwirn asked for clarification regarding the definition of Institutional as it applies to this parcel. Mounds View Planning Commission February 2, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson explained that Institutional would be for a school or government type building as opposed to something that would be privately held or an office campus setting. MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Stevenson. To Approve Resolution 783-05, Resolution Recommending Approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment From Outdoor Sport Recreation (SRO) and Passive Open Space (OSP) to Office (OFC) for the Bridges Redevelopment Site; Special Planning Case SP-134-05. Ayes –4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. _____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Consider Resolution 782-05, Recommending Acquisition of 2394 County Road 10, Donut Connection Community Development Director Ericson stated that the City Council had asked the Planning Commission to look at the option available to the City to acquire the Donut Connection, which is located at the intersection of County Road H2 and County Road 10. He indicated that the Donut Connection had originally approached the City in regards to selling the property because they understood that the City had a possible desire to redevelop the intersection. He also mentioned that there are intersection realignment plans already on file from the 2002 Corridor Improvement Plan prepared by URS. Director Ericson affirmed that the acquisition would be consistent with the City’s desire to improve the function of the corridor and to also improve land uses on the corridor. He mentioned that the City Council had discussed this possible acquisition at their last work session and they believe this opportunity to have potential. He acknowledged that there is a drawback in that the parcel is only 20,000 square feet and, as a stand-alone building, probably does not allow for much redevelopment. He added, however, that the adjacent gas station might be willing to sell and that the City could explore that possibility. He stated that the asking price for the Donut Connection is less than the Ramsey County assessed value so the City would be interested from a redevelopment standpoint. He added that the dollars that would be used to purchase the site would be TIF dollars. He informed the Planning Commission that his item would be at the City Council’s next work session and that the Council would like the Planning Commission’s input. Chair Stevenson pointed out that the future land use map shows the address as 2386 rather than 2394. Director Ericson confirmed that it is 2394, and he would make that change. Commissioner Miller expressed that there are some people who think the City should not be in the business of buying property and asked where the money for this comes from. Director Ericson responded that if it were not for governmental involvement, some projects simply would not happen, and that sometimes you must utilize tax increment dollars to help the process along. He added that this is the one redevelopment tool that the State provides to cities to help with redeveloping properties. He explained there are three TIF Districts in the City, and Mounds View Planning Commission February 2, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ that those will expire in 2012, 2013, and 2014, after which time all of those properties within the TIF Districts will come back onto the property tax rolls, and hopefully at that time they would have addressed all of the City’s priorities in terms of redevelopment. He explained that they would rather be involved in this redevelopment instead of letting nature take its course because sometimes you end up with uses you rather not have. Chair Stevenson affirmed that this is exactly what TIF was set up to do. Commissioner Miller added that she didn’t have any problem with it. Chair Stevenson pointed out that this is right along the County Road 10 corridor, and right where they want to develop, and he is very much for this. Director Ericson reiterated that this is a situation where the property owners had approached the City, and they had not been pursuing them. Commissioner Meehlhause stated that he supported the City buying the property. He expressed that his concern would be whether the present owners would not want to lease it back. He added that he did not want to see an empty building standing there, and hopefully the City would decide to take it down. Director Ericson responded that the City does not want an empty building on the corridor either and that removal of the building would be their recommendation. He added that if the present owner does not wish to lease it back, they probably would not be interested in trying to lease it out for another use. He added that it might be more conducive to level the site. Commissioner Zwirn stated that he does not feel that the community should be involved in purchasing real estate. He added however that this is a prime situation where the community should be involved. He expressed that he does not support TIF, but he thought this may a good use of the funds because the corridor needs to be redeveloped. MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Miller. To Approve Resolution 782-05, Resolution Recommending Approval of the Acquisition of the Donut Connection Parcel Located at 2394 County Road 10. Ayes –4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: February 16, 2005 Director Ericson mentioned that at the next Planning Commission meeting they would be considering new applications for the Planning Commission vacancy and that they would need to make a recommendation to the City Council. He added that the City Council would make the appointment on February 28th. Director Ericson announced that the public is welcome to submit an application for this vacancy. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission February 2, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ 8. 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, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Sheree Theobald TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.