HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-05-2005
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
October 5, 2005 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
a. September 7, 2005
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues
Not Already Present on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full
name and address for the minutes.)
5. Review of Commission Roles and Responsibilities
The City Attorney will be present to review the Commission’s roles and
responsibilities.
6. Planning Cases
A. MA2005-002 and PD2005-002: Preliminary Plat Review, Rezoning and
Development Stage Plan Review Associated with the Medtronic CRM Project
Applicant: Medtronic, Inc., represented by Jim Driessen
Address: 8290 Coral Sea Street
7. Other Planning Activity
none
8. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
October 19, 2005 at New Brighton City Hall
9. Adjourn to Agenda Session
Agenda Session
1. Review Minutes:
a. September 21, 2005
2. Staff Reports
a. Sept 26, 2005 City Council Meeting
b. Oct 3, 3005 City Council Meeting
c. Upcoming Planning Cases
3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners’ Reports
4. Meeting Conclusion
Item No: 5D
Meeting Date: October 5, 2005
Type of Business: Commission Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Jim Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Review and Consideration of the Medtronic CRM Preliminary Plat
and the Development Stage Plans of the Medtronic PUD, 8290
Coral Sea Street; Planning Cases PD2005-002 & MA2005-002
Introduction:
On June 27, 2005, the Mounds View City Council and Economic Development Authority
(EDA) authorized an agreement with Medtronic Inc. to redevelop the Bridges of Mounds View
golf course. The approved development was a multi-phased project with the first phase
encompassing approximately 820,000 square feet of office space and related ancillary uses.
On July 11, 2005, the City Council adopted Ordinance 760, an ordinance approving the
transfer of land from the City of Mounds View to the Mounds View EDA and then
subsequently to Medtronic.
PUD Intent:
The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process is to provide for the grouping of
land parcels for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to traditional parcel
by parcel, piecemeal, sporadic and unplanned approach to development. The PUD process is
intended to introduce flexibility of site design and architecture for the conservation of land and
open space through clustering of buildings and activities. It is further intended that planned unit
developments are to be characterized by central management, integrated planning and
architecture, joint or common use of parking, maintenance of open space and other similar
facilities and a harmonious selection and efficient distribution of uses. Given the visibility and
prominence of the Bridges site, the PUD approach will ensure that the site is developed to be
architecturally noteworthy and context sensitive from an environmental standpoint.
Previously:
The concept plan was reviewed by the Planning Commission informally on July 20, 2005 and
then formally on August 3, 2005. After taking testimony from staff, residents in attendance
and the applicant, the Commission considered the resolution of approval, which failed on a tie
vote. Those voting in opposition to the concept plan did so due to (among other reasons)
concerns about proposed building heights and the fact that the FAA had not yet consented to
the proposed heights. The City Council considered the concept plans at their meeting on
August 22, 2005, approving them without condition. The Council members supported the
proposed building heights recognizing that the additional height resulted in more greenspace
preserved on the site. Subsequent to the Planning Commission’s meeting on August 3, 2005,
the City was provided copies of correspondence from the FAA in which it consented to the
building heights as proposed. The Planning Commission reviewed the development stage
plans and preliminary plat on September 21, 2005. While votes were taken on the resolution,
no action occurred.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 2
Discussion:
Opus Architects & Engineers have submitted the detailed site plans, surveys and preliminary
plat for this second stage of the PUD process. The plans, date-stamped September 9, 2005,
include the following plan sheets:
1. S1 PUD Site Plan
2. C2 Existing Conditions
3. C3 Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control (SW Quad)
4. C4 Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control (SE Quad)
5. C5 Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control (NW Quad)
6. C6 Utility Plan (SW Quad)
7. C7 Utility Plan (SE Quad)
8. C8 Utility Plan (NW Quad)
9. C9 Stormwater Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP)
10. C10 SWPPP Details
11. C11 Site Details
12. C12 Additional Site details
13. C13 Wetland Mitigation Plan
14. A2.01 Master Floor Plan – Level 1
15. A2.02 Master Floor Plan – Level 2 and above
16. A3.0 Elevation Sheet
17. A3.1 Perspective Sheet
18. Topographic Survey – Blaine Land
19-21. Golf Course Boundary and Topographic Survey
22. Medtronic CRM Preliminary Plat
In addition to these full-size plan sheets, the Commission has been provided with 11 x 17
reduced color versions of Sheets A3.0 and A3.1, the Elevation and Perspective Sheets, as
well as the site plan.
What has changed?
In addition to the extra detail and scope of the plan submittal, a few minor revisions and
changes have been made to the plans presented to the Planning Commission on July 20 and
August 3. While the changes are not insignificant, they reflect only modifications to the
design and layout of the structures rather than bulk and height. As the Commission may
recall, the original concept plan identified four distinct buildings in a pin-wheel orientation tied
together by a two-story atrium-like commons area. While there remains four distinct eight-
story buildings, these are now all oriented in an east-west fashion to enhance environmental
sustainability. The first two phases would be linked together by stacked corridors and
meeting rooms 60 feet wide except at the main level where the connective space is 180 feet
wide. The first phase would be connected to the parking ramp north of the buildings at the
ground level, where the daycare and service areas would be located. The parking plan
remains the same, in that Phase 1 would include a three-story structured ramp to the north
and the 900 surface stalls near the building entrance. Phase 2 would involve two more floors
added to the north ramp and Phase 3 would involve a ramp in the City of Blaine.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 3
Building and Parking Phasing
Building Space Parking spaces
Phase 1
2 buildings connected by
Commons/atrium area
820,000 square feet total
2,100 structured stalls
900 surface stalls
Phase 2 1 additional building
380,000 more square feet
1,400 more structured stalls by
adding two more levels onto Phase
1 parking structure
Phase 3 1 additional building
300,000 more square feet
1,600 structured stalls in four level
ramp located in Blaine
Total at full
Build out
1,500,000 square feet in four
connected buildings
6,000 structured and surface parking
stalls, two parking structures
Building Perspective
Setbacks
The buildings are set back a minimum of 40-feet from the periphery lot line, which is
consistent with the minimum requirements within a PUD. The buildings will be no closer than
80 feet to Highway 10 and 60 feet to Coral Sea Street and 82 Lane NE. The Phase 1 parking
ramp will be set back 100 feet from Coral Sea Street to preserve an existing stand of mature
Scarlet Oak trees. The parking lot / ramp along 82 Lane NE will be set back 40 feet.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 4
The building will be constructed of precast concrete wall panels with horizontal and vertical
reveals. The base of the building will have a decorative or specialty stone base. The rooftop
utilities will be hidden from view by metal panel screens to match the color scheme of the
building. The facade will be dominated by a series of reflective one-inch thick vision glass
windows set in prefinished thermal break frames. The first floor of the building will have a 20-
foot sidewall height while all subsequent floors will be at a 15 foot height except the top floor
which will be 17 feet. The total building height, including the roof mounted mechanical
screens, will be 140 feet.
Traffic and Circulation
At the time of Phase 1 completion, Coral Sea Street will have been expanded to allow for five
full lanes of traffic movement at County Road J. Medtronic is proposing a small round-about
at the access to the parking ramp to help coordinate and channel traffic to the site. A second
larger round-about is planned at the primary entrance to the facility with a small, separate pull
out for child care pick-up and drop off. The buildings will be encircled by a twenty-foot wide
fire access road with a service spur to the back of the building for service and deliveries. In
this area as well there is another small round-about to help govern the flow of traffic. The
surface parking area will take access from 82nd Lane NE. The parking ramp will be accessed
from Coral Sea Street with the service road north and west of the ramp. There will be two
controlled intersections to serve the Medtronic project by the time of Phase 1 completion.
The County Road J and Coral Sea Street intersection will be signalized along with other
improvements to County Road J, to supplement the existing signalized intersection at County
J and West 35W Drive. Both intersections will permit through traffic movements to the north
after Coral Sea is reconstructed north of County Road J.
Building Elevation
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 5
Landscape Plan
The City Forester has been provided a copy of the Landscape Plan which is illustrated on
Sheet S-1, PUD Site Plan. City Forester Wriskey indicates the variety and locations of
plantings are satisfactory but cautions that plantings in parking lot islands and infiltration
swales could become damaged during winter months if care is not exercised while plowing
the parking lot. Mr. Wriskey will work directly with the landscape planner and contractor to
monitor installation.
Trail System
Consistent with their other locations, the Medtronic plans identify a system of trails for
employee usage. Much of the existing golf course trail system will be preserved and tied back
to the facility, including the boardwalk through the primary wetland. The trails are shown on
the site plan below. While not a part of this plan, the City intends to explore construction of a
separate trail system within the Sysco Outlot area which residents, Medtronic employees,
Sysco employees or any other workers in the area could utilize.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 6
Stormwater and Wetlands Management
Page C13 of the plans illustrates the Wetland Mitigation plan and identifies all stormwater
ponds to serve the development. All runoff and necessary mitigation will be contained and
captured on site. Only one wetland in the project area will be impacted, that being the area
labeled 1B alongside the Phase 1 parking ramp. The other area, while identified as a
wetland, is the present location of Judicial Ditch #1. The ditch will be relocated away from the
building alongside Highway 10 with a wider, more natural, meandering channel. (The site
plan on the previous pages illustrates the new ditch location.) Presently, there are
approximately 25 acres of wetlands and ponds on the site. Two new stormwater ponds will
be created and an existing pond expanded to accommodate the run off on site. Medtronic
has applied for a stormwater permit from the Rice Creek Watershed District. The City Council
will consider Medtronic’s wetland alteration permit in October.
Utilities
The golf course site is presently served by the City of Blaine for water and sanitary services.
For this project, the City will install a new sanitary and a looped water service under Highway
10 for Medtronic. While there had been some discussion about using Blaine’s water supply
for fire suppression purposes, it made more sense to utilize just one supply for both potable
water and fire suppression. The water main will be looped around the building with fire
hydrants spaced per fire code regulations. The sanitary lines will run parallel to the building
on the west and east elevations. Storm sewers will be constructed to serve the site with catch
basins located along the fire access road and in the surface parking lot. The storm sewers
will drain into the two stormwater ponds on either side of the building. All utilities will be
installed underground.
The Planning Commission, at their meeting on September 21, 2005, had questions relating to
utilities that would serve the site. As was indicated at the meeting, `a feasibility study will be
conducted to assess the feasibility and cost to bring the sewer and water to the site under
Highway 10. Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik and Associates has done a preliminary review and
has provided an engineers estimate of $800,000 to complete the work, $400,000 of which
would be paid by Medtronic. If the feasibility study indicates the cost would be excessive or
prohibitive, it would be likely that the Blaine utilities would be considered instead. Greg Lee,
Public Works Director for the City, will be present at the meeting to address any questions the
Commission may have relative to utilities.
Lighting
A lighting plan or photometric analysis was not provided with the development stage plans.
While Staff has communicated with the applicant’s representatives that such a plan will be
required, the distance from residential uses and the setbacks from other properties, it will not
be difficult to satisfy the minimum requirements. A stipulation has been added to the
Planning Commission’s resolution which requires that such a plan be submitted prior to City
Council consideration.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 7
Signage
A sign plan has not yet been submitted for review. The resolution will include a requirement
that all signage be code compliant unless otherwise permitted or authorized by the PUD
Document. Given the extensive frontage along Highway 10, more than one ground sign may
be constructed which would be consistent with Section1008.10 of the Sign Code. The Sign
Code does not place a maximum square footage on ground signs in a PUD, the code
expressly defers to the PUD narrative document. Staff will work with Medtronic to allow for a
gateway sign to be located on Medtronic property near 35 W and Highway 10.
PUD Evaluation Criteria
The City Code highlights certain criteria which need to be satisfied to qualify for PUD
development stage approval. The criteria, along with responses, are shown below:
(1) Adequate property control is provided to protect the individual owner's rights and
property values and the public responsibility for own maintenance and upkeep.
The City has entered into a development agreement with Medtronic and have agreed to
all terms, conditions and provisions regarding the sale of the property.
(2) The interior circulation plan plus access from and onto public rights of way does not
create congestion or dangers and is adequate for the safety of the project residents and
the general public.
The City authorized an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) in 2004 to examine
the potential impacts and the maximum development potential of the site. The
transportation impacts were reviewed and a mitigation plan prepared in response. The
transportation improvements have received funding and the preparations are already
underway to allow for a completion date of September 2007. Access to the site will be
gained from two controlled (signalized) intersections on County Road J. Freeway access
can be achieved at either Highway 10 or 35W. Other than the fire access road, there will
be no vehicle access internal to the site.
(3) A sufficient amount of usable open space is provided.
There will be significant open space preserved on the site. In addition to the 25 acres of
ponds and wetlands, much of the east side of the project area will be maintain as a
natural area with seasonally cut meadows, prairie grasses and wildflowers. Altogether,
including the Blaine land, 60 of the 85 acres, or 71% or the land area, is greenspace.
(4) The arrangement of buildings, structures and accessory uses does not unreasonably
disturb the privacy or property values of the surrounding residential uses.
The only nearby residential areas are those to the south of Highway 10. The buildings
will be more than 400 feet from the residential land to the south and southwest,
separated by the freeway. The Medtronic development will not adversely impact these
residential parcels and will likely serve to enhance property values, if anything.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 8
(5) The architectural design of the project is compatible with the surrounding area.
The design of the proposed Medtronic building will likely be more extensive than of the
surrounding office and industrial buildings. While definitely more significant than the
other buildings in the area, the design will not be out of character or inconsistent with
the other uses.
(6) The drainage and utility system plans are submitted to and subject to the approval of the
Director of Public Works/City Engineer.
The drainage and utility system plans are being reviewed by Mounds View’s public
works department and will be reviewed by Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik and Associates.
In addition, Rice Creek Watershed District engineers will be reviewing the plans and will
be making a recommendation to the watershed district’s Board of Commissioner’s
regarding the wetland mitigation plans. The City Council will be considering the Wetland
Alteration Permit in October.
(7) The development schedule insures a logical development of the site which will protect
the public interest and conserve land.
The site will be developed in three phases—the first phase will include 820,000 square
feet of office space in two eight-story buildings connected by skywalks and conference
rooms. The parking for phase one will be provided in two areas—a three story ramp of
2100 stalls and a surface lot of 900 stalls. Phases two and three are logically planned
for future development as dictated by the needs of Medtronic.
(8) The development is in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 1010 and Titles
1200 and 1300 of this Code.
Chapter 1010 of the Municipal Code relates to wetlands and wetland zoning. The
development impacts a portion of one small wetland which will be mitigated to RCWD
standards. Mitigation will also be provided for the relocated judicial ditch, which was
identified as a wetland type area by RCWD engineers. Medtronic has applied for a
permit consistent with the requirements and standards of Chapter 1010 which the
Council will consider in October. Title 1200 refers to subdivisions and is addressed later
in this report. Title 1300 relating to Flood Plain management will be addressed by Rice
Creek Watershed District and the City’s consulting engineer prior to consideration of the
wetland alteration permit.
(9) Dwelling unit and accessory use requirements are in compliance with the district
provisions in which the development is planned.
There are no residential uses associated with this planned unit development. Accessory
uses will be allowed and permitted which would be consistent with and supportive of the
extensive workforce employed at this site. Accessory uses may include a day care
facility, café, restaurant, dining area, education, retail, fitness area and a ballroom to
support the primary office and lab space.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 9
Snow Storage
The design of the Medtronic project on the site provides for numerous areas in which snow
may be collected during winter months. The City Forester cautions that landscaping be
planted with some forethought as to snow plow routes and snow storage. Medtronic will be
responsible for snow removal from the site if the available parking spaces are insufficient to
satisfy the daily needs of the facility.
Municipal Coordination
OPUS and Medtronic will be presenting their site plans and preliminary plat to the City of
Blaine on October 11 and October 20. Blaine will need to approve any redesign of Coral Sea
Street and 82 Lane NE as they are Blaine streets. Blaine has been supportive of the
Medtronic development plans and improvements to County Road J and the bridge over 35W.
Preliminary Plat Issues
The Medtronic CRM preliminary plat was prepared by E. G. RUD & Sons, Inc. The plat
proposes five distinct lots in one block. The lot layout is summarized in the table below.
Copies of the Medtronic CRM preliminary plat have been provided to the City’s public works
department, the City Attorney and Ramsey County. Ramsey County will forward copies of the
plat to MnDOT since the property abuts state right of way, even though no access or change
is planned to Highway 10 or 35W.
Lot Proposed Usage Lot Area (acres / sq. ft.)
Lot 1 Phase 1
820,000 sq. ft.
27.77 acres
1,209,626 sq. ft.
Lot 2 Phase 2
380,000 sq. ft.
3.17 acres
138,269 sq. ft
Lot 3 Phase 3
300,000 sq. ft
2.32 acres
101,117 sq. ft
Lot 4 Blaine lots, parking
areas
15.83 acres
689,453 sq. ft.
Outlot A Wetlands, ponds,
mitigations areas
36.17 acres
1,575,752 sq. ft.
Total area: 85.26 acres
3,714,217 sq. ft
While only five lots are shown on the preliminary plat, it is likely the case that a sixth lot will be
added which would encompass the first phase parking ramp north of the phase 1 buildings. It
may also be the case that after the preliminary plat has been approved, the lot lines and area
for lots 2 and 3 may be adjusted on the final plat. Such changes, so long as they do not alter
the essential character and nature of the preliminary plat, may be approved.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 10
Easements
Perimeter drainage and utility easements will be taken with this plat, although the exact
dimensions and locations are yet to be determined. It is likely that easements will be taken
over all ponds, wetlands and storm water conveyance systems. There are existing
easements associated with the Northstar Industrial Park and Northstar Industrial Park 2nd
Addition plats that will need to be vacated. There is an easement toward the east end of the
Medtronic CRM preliminary plat protecting a Met Council Environmental Services sanitary
sewer interceptor, buried thirty feet underground. This will remain unchanged.
Right of Way
No internal road system will be needed with this development. There is however excess right
of way shown on the preliminary plat that is proposed for vacation: Ardan Avenue, Edgewood
Drive and Jackson Drive. These rights of way were originally platted with the Laport
Meadows subdivision from the 1940s yet were never improved. According to the City
Charter, excess right of way (as well as any excess easement) is vacated by ordinance.
Park Dedication Fees
Consistent with Chapter 1202, a park dedication fee would be applicable with this subdivision
of land. Normally the City will assess a fee of either five or ten percent of the land value less
improvements, as determined by Ramsey County. The 2006 County assessed valuation of
the land being subdivided is $7,500,000. Assuming a ten percent dedication, the City would
expect to receive $750,000. In this case, the amount of the dedication--$865,000--was
agreed upon during the contract negotiations based on the purchase price of the land. The
dedication fee will be paid at the time of building permit application.
Comprehensive Plan Consistency
The division of land as proposed by the preliminary plat would be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, as amended by the City Council and approved by the Metropolitan
Council. The Future Land use Map designates this land as “Office” which is the use planned
with this subdivision.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 11
Rezoning
With the general concept plans for the Medtronic Planned Unit Development approved, the
City must consider a rezoning of the project area from the existing Light Industrial (I-1)
designation to Planned Unit Development (PUD). Typically this is done at the development
stage of the PUD process consistent with the final Council approval of the site plans. The
City Code requires that the Planning Commission examine potential adverse effects
associated with a proposed rezoning by addressing five questions. The questions, along with
responses, are as follows:
(1) Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan.
The rezoning to PUD would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the
City Council recently authorized an amendment to the future land use map from
Outdoor Sport Recreation and Passive Open Space to Office. While the current
Light Industrial zoning of the site is consistent with the Office designation, the PUD
zoning would provide greater flexibility, clustering of buildings, open space
preservation and staging of the development along with the added protection of a
very specific set of land-use requirements articulated in the PUD document.
(2) The geographical area involved.
The area is located north of Highway 10 and west of Interstate 35W, effectively
detached from the rest of the community. A 46-acre wooded natural area is adjacent
to the site to the west with developed industrial uses to the north. Nearly sixteen
acres of the project area are in the City of Blaine, the rezoning action being
considered would not extend into Blaine as Mounds View does not have zoning
jurisdiction in other communities.
(3) Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed.
The current Ramsey County assessed valuation for the project area is set at $7.5
million. Currently the site generates no taxes and does not contribute to County and
school district tax collections. After the sale of land, the area would immediately
become taxable and it is anticipated the County will establish a valuation in excess
of current levels. Taxes would be payable to all taxing jurisdictions on the base
value of the land. After the first phase of the project has been constructed, taxes
would be paid on the value of the land and the improvements, the value of which will
likely exceed $75,000,000. While it is true that Medtronic would receive TIF
payments to reimburse them for eligible project costs, the state of Minnesota and
the school district will benefit. If the state and the school district benefits, so too
does Mounds View. Finally, the new value of the Medtronic project would be figured
in to any current and future school district bond levies which will result in lower tax
payments to all other property owners. For these and other reasons, the rezoning
will not depreciate the area in which it is proposed.
Medtronic Review
October 5, 2005
Page 12
(4) The character of the surrounding area.
The surrounding area is predominately industrial, with industrial buildings, industrial
uses, offices and other accessory industrial features such as outdoor heavy
equipment parking and storage, loading docks, shipping and receiving terminals
bordered by freeways and a busy county road. The proposed rezoning will allow for
a corporate office campus associated with the largest division of Medtronic, its
Cardiac Rhythm Management division.
(5) The demonstrated need for such use.
The need has been demonstrated by more than a year of discussions and
negotiations between the City and Medtronic, discussions and negotiations
between the City and the legislature, between the City and various state agencies
and has been expressed in a year of discussion and cooperation between the City
and the counties or Ramsey and Anoka, and the cities of Blaine and Shoreview,
all of who are supportive of this project. Finally, the need was articulated in
resolution and ordinance format by the Mounds View City Council.
Adverse Effects Summary: Staff would submit that there are no compelling adverse
effects associated with this project, and any impacts resulting from the proposed
development will be or have been mitigated to the satisfactory approvals of all
governing agencies, including, but not limited to, the Metropolitan Council, the
Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the
Rice Creek Watershed District, the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal
Aviation Administration.
Recommendation:
Based upon all of the above information and the supporting plans and documentation
associated with this request, staff recommends the following actions be considered by the
Planning Commission:
1. Medtronic development stage plan recommendation of approval
2. Medtronic CRM preliminary plat recommendation of approval.
3. Recommendation of approval of a rezoning from I-1 to PUD.
Staff has prepared a resolution of approval for the above items which is attached to this report
as Resolution 815-05. If anyone should have questions regarding this report or the plans
which you already have in your possession, please do not hesitate to contact me at 763-717-
4021.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Ericson
Community Development Director
Zoning Map
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 815-05
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE MEDTRONIC DEVELOPMENT
STAGE PLANS, THE MEDTRONIC CRM PRELIMINARY PLAT AND THE REZONING
OF THE PROJECT AREA FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT; PLANNING CASES PD2005-002 AND MA2005-02
WHEREAS, Medtronic, Inc., has submitted an application for a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) for an 820,000 square foot corporate office campus on 72 acres of land
and is requesting approval of the PUD development stage plans; and,
WHEREAS, Medtronic, Inc., has submitted an application for a Major Subdivision of
the project area to support the requested Planned Unit Development; and,
WHEREAS, the land to be developed by Medtronic represents the City’s Bridges Golf
Course located north of Highway 10 and west of Interstate 35W at 8390 Coral Sea Street,
legally described as follows:
Refer to Exhibit A
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on August 22, 2005
and at this meeting approved the general concept plans for the Medtronic PUD; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed Chapter 1120 of the
Mounds View Municipal Code pertaining to planned unit developments; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed Chapter 1120 and
Title 1200 of the Mounds View Municipal Code relating to PUDs and subdivisions of land,
respectively; and,
WHEREAS, The Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the development
stage plans and preliminary plat date-stamped September 9, 2005, relative to this request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission,
recognizing that the general concept plans have been approved, makes the following findings
of fact related to the Medtronic development stage plans, preliminary plat and rezoning
request:
1. The development stage plans are consistent with the approved general concept
stage plans.
2. The development stage plans satisfy all codes, requirements and regulations.
3. The Medtronic project is a staged development—no further review will be required
of subsequent phases so long as they remain consistent with the approved plans.
Resolution 815-05
Page 2
4. An extensive amount of natural areas, wetlands, woods, ponds and open space is
preserved in the development area.
5. The City Forester has reviewed and supports the landscape plan as presented.
6. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has consented to the proposed building
heights of 140 feet.
7. The proposed development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
8. The Medtronic CRM preliminary plat satisfies all requirements of Title 1200 relating
to land subdivisions.
9. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not
cause or generate adverse effects to adjoining property owners of the community
in general.
10. As addressed in the Bridges Office Park AUAR, a mitigation plan was adopted to
address transportation and traffic deficiencies resulting from the development with
preparations for the improvements already underway.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission takes the following actions relating to the Medtronic CRM development:
1. Recommendation of approval of the development stage plans date-stamped
September 9, 2005 for the Medtronic PUD subject to the following conditions:
a. The applicant or applicant’s representatives shall prepare and submit a
detailed light plan with exterior fixture specifications, light standard heights
and a photometric analysis.
b. The plans shall be revised to show areas set aside for snow storage.
c. Accessory storage structures, while none are shown on the plan, shall be
allowed consistent with provisions of Title 1000 and Title 1100 of the Mounds
View Municipal Code.
d. The applicant shall request and obtain approval for all proposed work to occur
in the City of Blaine.
e. The applicant shall execute a development agreement relating to the project
and a PUD Narrative document outlining the specific requirements associated
with the project.
2. Recommendation of approval of the Medtronic CRM preliminary plat date-stamped
September 9, 2005 and associated easement and right of way vacations subject to the
following conditions:
a. The preliminary plat shall be revised to show a perimeter drainage and utility
easement and easements over all ponds, wetlands, mitigation areas and
drainage conveyances.
b. Legal descriptions shall be prepared by the applicant or applicant’s
representative for those areas proposed to be vacated.
c. The applicant shall seek and gain approval from the City of Blaine regarding
the preliminary plat, specifically, proposed Lot 4.
Resolution 815-05
Page 3
d. The applicant shall execute a subdivision agreement as required by Section
1202.05 of the Subdivisions regulations. The terms of such an agreement
may be incorporated within the development agreement referred to in
condition 1e above.
3. Recommendation of approval of the proposed rezoning of the project area within
the City of Mounds View from Light Industrial to Planned Unit Development as consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this
resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes.
Adopted this 5th day of October, 2005.
_______________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Jim Ericson, Community Development Director
(SEAL)
EXHIBIT A – Medtronic PUD Legal Description
Parcel 1:
Outlot A and Lot 4, Block 1, North Star Industrial Park 2nd Addition, according to the recorded
plat thereof; and situate in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
Parcel 2:
Lot 16, Block 2, North Star Industrial Park, except the easterly 40 feet thereof, according to
the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
Parcel 3: That part of Tract A described below:
Tract A.
The South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 30 North, Range 23
West, Ramsey County, Minnesota, which lies northerly and westerly of the following
described line:
Commencing at the center of said Section 5; thence north on an azimuth of 359
degrees 23 minutes 10 seconds (azimuth oriented to Minnesota State Plane
Coordinate System) along the north and south quarter line of said Section 5 for 781.42
feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence on an azimuth of 108
degrees 12 minutes 41 seconds, 231.14 feet; thence on an azimuth of 98 degrees 27
minutes 03 seconds, 1486.78 feet; thence run northeasterly for 447.16 feet on a non-
tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a radius of 720 feet, a delta angle
of 35 degrees 35 minutes 02 seconds and a chord azimuth of 76 degrees 55 minutes
11 seconds; thence on an azimuth of 59 degrees 07 minutes 40 seconds, 192.89 feet;
thence run northerly 398.14 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest,
having a radius of 850 feet; a delta angle of 26 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds and a
chord azimuth of 29 degrees 26 minutes 05 seconds; thence on an azimuth of 16
degrees 00 minutes 57 seconds, 303.65 feet to the north line of said Tract A and there
terminating;
Parcel 4:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 13, 14 and 15, Block 1 and Lots 1, 2, 3, Lot 4 except the South 60 feet and Lot
5 except the South 222.2 feet, Block 2, Laport Meadows, according to the recorded plat
thereof, and situate in Ramsey County, Minnesota, except those portions which lie
southwesterly of a line run parallel with and distant 100 feet northeasterly of the following
described line:
Beginning at a point on the west line of Section 5, Township 30 North, Range 23 West
distant 688.09 feet south of the northwest corner thereof; thence run southeasterly at
an angle of 142 degrees 35 minutes 45 seconds with said west section line for
1278.48 feet; thence deflect to the left on a 03 degrees 00 minute curve (delta angle
33 degrees 39 minutes 25 seconds) for 1121.90 feet; thence on a tangent to said
curve for 1100.00 feet and there terminating.
(These legal descriptions do not include parcels in Blaine.)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
September 21, 2005
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
______________________________________________________________________________
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Acting Chair Miller at 7:00 p.m. September 21, 2005.
______________________________________________________________________________
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Miller, Zwirn, Hegland, Hull, Meehlhause, and Scotch
Absent and Excused: Commissioner Stevenson
Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson, Planning Associate Heller,
and Economic Development Coordinator Backman
______________________________________________________________________________
Index to Minutes Page
Planning Case DE2005-003. Consideration of a Development
Review for a Single Story Office Building. 02
Planning Case MI2005-007. Consideration of a Minor
Subdivision Request – Lot Line Adjustment. 04
Planning Case MA2005-001. Consideration of a Preliminary
Plat Review and Rezoning Associated with SYSCO Second
Addition. 04
Planning Case MA2005-002 and PD2005-002. Consideration
of a Preliminary Plat Review, Rezoning, and Development Stage
Plan Review Associated with the Medtronic CRM Project. 06
_______________________________________________________________________
3. Approve Minutes
August 17, 2005.
Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 2
________________________________________________________________________
MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Meehlhause. To approve the Minutes of the August 17, 2005
regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes –6 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
______________________________________________________________________________
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
______________________________________________________________________________
5. Planning Case DE2005-003. Consideration of a Development Review for a Single
Story Office Building Planning.
Community Development Director Ericson reviewed the staff report indicating the applicant, Dr.
Greg Belting, Silverview Chiropractic Center, is requesting a development review approval for
the proposed 8,300 square foot single story office building at 2395 County Road 10. The City
approved an amendment to the Walgreens PUD in July of 2005 to permit “office” as an
allowable use on this site.
Director Ericson stated parking requirements are 50 stalls, whereby the site plan indicates 43
stalls with the remaining seven stalls available on the adjacent Walgreens site, as was originally
the plan. Building setbacks are in excess of the minimum. The Walgreens PUD requires that the
building shall be of high-quality masonry construction using brick and brick accents to match the
Community Center, theater, and City Hall. There are areas on the site in which snow may be
plowed and piled in the winter. The City Forester has approved the landscape requirements with
the recommendation of swapping some types of plantings. Staff will review a signage permit to
ensure consistency with both the PUD and Municipal Code. The site was master graded during
construction of the Walgreens building and a large stormwater pond installed southeast of the
site. An easement originally platted with the Mounds View City Hall Addition will be vacated.
Director Ericson noted the proposed office use on the undeveloped parcel would be consistent
with the City’s Zoning Code and Comp Plan and would bring development and tax base to the
site. He referenced the resolution conditions and recommended the Planning Commission
approve the development review.
Acting Chair Miller asked if Dr. Belting had any comments. Dr. Belting stated the City has been
great to work with and he is trying to provide a nice building for the community. He added the
front of the building will be brick but questioned if the entire building needs to be brick.
Tom Belting, brother of Dr. Belting, also questioned the other three building sides being brick.
He suggested these three sides would be maintenance free aluminum siding with additional
landscaping if needed. He added the brick would tie in with neighboring buildings.
Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 3
________________________________________________________________________
Acting Chair Miller asked if the proposed exterior mix of brick and siding meets with what is in
the resolution. Director Ericson stated no, the PUD document requires all four sides to have
consistent architectural treatment; that is why Walgreens’ exterior is entirely brick. He noted
this issue was not discussed prior to the meeting. He added if the applicant wishes to deviate
from the PUD an amendment could be requested.
Acting Chair Miller asked about handicap spots. She also asked about park dedication fees.
Director Ericson stated there are two handicap spots on the site plan, which is consistent with
ADA requirements. He added no park dedication fees are required because they were collected
when Walgreens was built.
Commissioner Zwirn asked if the back of the proposed building faces the Community Center,
suggesting if it is visible the building should be brick on all four sides. Director Ericson stated
the Community Center is to the north of the proposed building so one side would be facing it.
Acting Chair Miller asked about windows on the side facing the Community Center. Dr. Belting
stated there are windows. He added most office buildings have a front facade and maintenance
free siding on the rest of the building. He suggested adding additional landscaping.
Commissioner Scotch stated she likes the architectural design and noted brick on all four sides
would be expensive. Dr. Belting confirmed that it would be more expensive and heavier
looking, too. He presented an example of the brick that would be used.
Commissioner Scotch asked when they would be breaking ground. Dr. Belting replied
November 1, 2005.
Commissioner Meehlhause asked about approving the resolution with some type of variance.
Director Ericson replied the Commission could forward its recommendation to Council with a
siding recommendation.
Commissioner Hull asked what would look better cosmetically. Director Ericson stated all four
sides the same would and brick, which was the original intent, looks richer and classier.
Commissioner Hegland asked if there needs to be a formal request for a siding change. Director
Ericson stated a formal request could be submitted, but Council has the latitude to grant
something different than originally approved.
Acting Chair Miller stated brick siding is part of the original agreement and suggested the
Commission stay with that. She suggested the resolution be passed as written and let Council
make any changes they want.
MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Zwirn. To approve Resolution 817-05, a Resolution
Recommending Approval of a Development Review for a Single Story Office Building;
Planning Case No. DE2005-003.
Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 4
________________________________________________________________________
Ayes –6 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
______________________________________________________________________________
Acting Chair Miller recessed the meeting at 7:20 p.m. due to severe weather.
Acting Chair Miller reconvened the meeting at 7:40 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________________
6. Planning Case MI2005-007. Consideration of a Minor Subdivision Request – Lot
Line Adjustment.
Community Development Director Ericson reviewed the staff report indicating the applicant,
James Benson, 8123 Pleasant View Court and 8117-8119 Pleasant View Court, is requesting a
minor subdivision to move the common lot line of 8123 Pleasant View Court south 33.80 feet to
meet the most southeasterly corner of 817-8119 Pleasant View Court. He added because no new
lots are created by this subdivision and no additional development would occur, no park
dedication fees should be required.
Director Ericson stated that given no new development would occur, a public notice is not
required. He recommended the Commission approve the minor subdivision as requested.
Commissioner Acting Chair Miller stated the subdivision request seems to be straightforward.
She requested a wording correction from “applicants” to “applicant” on Resolution 816-05, page
2, numbers 1 and 2. Director Ericson replied the corrections would be made. He added the
request would be on the October 10, 2005 Council agenda.
MOTION/SECOND: Scotch/Zwirn. To approve Resolution 816-05, a Resolution
Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision Request – Lot Line Adjustment; Planning
Case No. MI2005-007.
Ayes –6 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
_____________________________________________________________________________
7. Planning Case MA2005-001. Consideration of a Preliminary Plat Review and
Rezoning Associated with SYSCO Second Addition.
Community Development Director Ericson reviewed the staff report indicating the applicant,
SYSCO Minnesota, represented by Phil Seipp, President, is requesting approval of a preliminary
plat for the SYSCO Second Addition major subdivision and the rezoning of the land transferred
to SYSCO. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the existing zoning of the property, and
the Planning Commission and Council reviewed and approved an amendment to the PUD to
allow for the expanded development area.
Director Ericson stated preliminary plat revisions include a possible vacate of the residual Long
Lake Road right of way from when Long Lake Road terminated at County Road J, before
Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 5
________________________________________________________________________
Highway 10 was constructed. Utilities within the residual right of way would continue to be
protected by a utility easement. An easement over a wetland area will need to be partially
vacated, as the new lot line would bisect the easement. He noted an issue with the City’s AUAR
whereby the Met Council and EDA are requesting an amendment to detach the three acres from
the lot. He suggested an addition to the resolution under “Now, Therefore, Be It Further
Resolved” stating the AUAR needs to be consistent with the original document.
Director Ericson requested the Planning Commission review and consider the SYSCO Second
Addition preliminary plat and proposed rezoning.
Acting Chair Miller asked where is the addition to the resolution. She requested a correction on
Resolution 813-05, page 2, number 1, under “Be It Further Resolved” to delete “be” in the last
sentence. Director Ericson stated the addition is on page 2, after “Be It Further Resolved”. He
added the correction would be made.
Commissioner Zwirn asked if the proposed right of way to be vacated is being utilized. He
suggested if it were vacated, SYSCO would have the right to utilize it. Director Ericson stated
there is utilities are the space and SYSCO could utilize it.
Commissioner Zwirn asked how the TIF financing is allocated. He stated during the process of
deeding back land there was no discussion of developing the parcel or of TIF financing. Director
Ericson stated the EDA authorized a two-year TIF project, which provides $250,000 in financing
paid over two years. He added that requesting TIF to assist with stormwater improvements and
other documented expenses was always part of the project.
Acting Chair Miller asked for comments from SYSCO.
Chris Carda, RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd., stated within the Bridges AUAR, the wetland mitigation plan
defined no wetland impacts in these three acres requesting to be returned to SYSCO. However,
the Met Council recently noted there is a half-acre impact within these acres. He added the
acreage is not being removed from the AUAR but needs to show an impact. He noted there is no
process to remove an area from an AUAR; however, the document needs to be amended to be
consistent.
Commissioner Zwirn asked if the Commission approves the recommended amendment, do they
agree to the impact of the wetland. He also asked if there would be an exchange of land. Mr.
Carda replied the rules and regulations of the Rice Creek Watershed District must be followed.
He noted the request is to approve amending the AUAR stating there is wetland impact in this
area. He added there would be an exchange of land; the plan is to mitigate these wetlands
according to the Wetland Conservation Act.
Phil Seipp, President, stated connecting Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2, does not bring value
to SYSCO.
Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 6
________________________________________________________________________
Commissioner Scotch asked what is on the property and can it be built on. Mr. Seipp replied
nothing is on the property and nothing could likely be built on it.
Commissioner Zwirn stated the parcel could be paved for additional parking. Mr. Seipp agreed.
Commissioner Scotch noted there are water mains underneath and questioned whether it could
be paved over. Mr. Seipp confirmed the presence of a water and natural gas main.
Commissioner Hegland asked if there are any plans to use this parcel. Mr. Seipp replied no.
Commissioner Scotch stated she did not know about TIF. Acting Chair Miller stated financing is
not the Commission’s responsibility.
Commissioner Zwirn asked when they would be allocating the TIF funds. Mr. Seipp replied
because of issues such as wetland mitigation and providing access to the City on the west side
ponding area, in order to get approval from corporate, he felt if they could hold down their costs
to approximately one million it would be approved.
Commissioner Hegland asked if there were extra costs equivalent to the TIF funds. Mr. Carda
replied the cost for wetland impacts and stormwater ponding is close to $300,000.
Commissioner Scotch noted no park dedication fees have been applied and feels there should be
some applied. Mr. Carda replied during development in 1989 SYSCO gave 46 acres to the City,
in addition to paying a Park Dedication Fee.
Commissioner Zwirn noted concerns regarding SYSCO coming to the City and asking for TIF,
but not paying any park dedication fees because land was given to the City. Director Ericson
noted it was always the position of SYSCO to ask for TIF, adding that it is not the Commission’s
responsibility to review or approve TIF financing. The City Council felt park dedication fees
were not necessary since the City was given land.
MOTION/SECOND: Meehlhause/Hull. To approve Resolution 813-05, a Resolution
Recommending Approval of a Preliminary Plat Review and Rezoning Associated with SYSCO
Second Addition with the added Further Be It Resolved; Planning Case No. MA2005-001.
Ayes –6 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
______________________________________________________________________________
8. Planning Case MA2005-002 and PD2005-002. Consideration of a Preliminary Plat
Review, Rezoning, and Development Stage Plan Review Associated with the
Medtronic CRM Project.
Community Development Director Ericson reviewed the staff report indicating the applicant,
Medtronic, Inc., is requesting approval of a preliminary plat and development stage plans of the
Medtronic PUD. The development is a multi-phased project with the first phase encompassing
Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 7
________________________________________________________________________
approximately 820,000 square feet of office space and related ancillary uses. There remains four
distinct eight-story buildings but they are now all oriented in an east-west fashion to enhance
environmental sustainability. He reviewed the three different phases in terms of buildings,
parking, and square footage.
Director Ericson noted the buildings will be no closer than 80 feet to Highway 10 and no closer
than 60 feet to Coral Sea Street and 82 Lane NE. The City Forester approved the variety and
locations of plantings. Much of the existing golf course trail system will be preserved and tied
back to the facility, including the boardwalk through the primary wetland. The City intends to
explore construction of a separate trail system within the SYSCO Outlot area which residents,
Medtronic employees, SYSCO employees, and others could utilize. Only one wetland in the
project area will be impacted. Medtronic has applied for a stormwater permit from the Rice
Creek Watershed District. All utilities will be installed underground. A sign plan has not yet
been submitted for review. He noted all of the PUD evaluation criteria have been satisfied. He
added with approval of this resolution Medtronic could continue to phase 2 without another
approval.
Director Ericson referenced the preliminary plat noting there are four lots, and Outlot A, and a
possible sixth lot which would encompass the first phase parking ramp north of the phase 1
buildings. The perimeter drainage and utility easements will be taken with the plat, although the
exact dimensions and locations are yet to be determined. No internal road system will be
needed; however, there is excess right of ways that is proposed for vacation. Park dedication
fees of $865,000 were agreed upon during contract negotiations. The City must consider a
rezoning of the project area from the existing Light Industrial (l-1) designation to Planned Unit
Development (PUD).
Director Ericson stated there are no compelling adverse effects associated with this project. He
requested the Planning Commission review and consider the development stage plan, the CRM
preliminary plat, and approval of a rezoning from l-1 to PUD. He reminded the Commission not
to take into account their support, or lack of, tax increment financing, the land sale price, or
actions conducted by others who do not support the project.
Acting Chair Miller request wording corrections to Resolution 815-05; second line, first page “a”
instead of “an” and on the last page, section d, second line, “Subdivision” instead of
“Subdivisions”. Director Ericson replied the corrections would be made.
Acting Chair Miller asked about garbage. She also asked about a fire access road. She added
she likes the idea of the relocated judicial ditch. Dan Dixon, OPUS Architects & Engineers, Inc.,
replied in phase 1 they are proposing a service area in the loop which will have compactors,
garbage bins, etc. Mr. Dixon added there is a 20-foot wide road beyond the service entrance for
fire access that is not a service drive.
Commissioner Hegland asked about adding sewer and water supplies on Highway 10. Director
Ericson replied utilities are available from Blaine, but the City felt they should be responsible for
providing these services. He referenced the site plan showing two 12-inch water mains, which
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
Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 9
________________________________________________________________________
comfortable dealing with solid numbers from professionals which the Commission does not
have. He noted the plan estimate is $400,000 but believes it would be much higher. He noted
water for fire suppression, fresh water, and sanitary sewer are TIF eligible up to $400,000. If the
end result is more expensive than TIF will produce, the contract previously signed will allow the
company to use other funds. He added he is not sure this will not put the City in a bind in the
future. He noted once the utilities are done Medtronic turns all infrastructures over to the City.
If breakdowns occur the City must fix the problem out of the general fund.
Mr. McCarty referenced the Staff report, page 7, and asked how much of the east side will be
maintained as open space. He suggested it state “have a permanent open space easement”
because the current wording suggests there are no guarantees. He added it was always inferred
that the 35 and County Road J bridge would be improved; however, according to page 9 of the
Staff report it is not going to happen so where will traffic go. He stated he does not know how a
decision on this issue can be made tonight.
Director Ericson stated regarding the utilities, the City would be responsible up to the property
line. He added Medtronic would pay all improvement costs beyond the property line. Mr.
McCarty stated yes, for installation and construction but who pays after that. Director Ericson
stated it would be private.
Commissioner Scotch asked when phase 2 is expected to start. Jim Driessen, Medtronic Inc.,
replied there is no timeline; it is based on growth. The Commission is being asked to review the
full build out because the total plan is being presented now.
Economic Development Coordinator Backman stated in terms of water and sewer, there have
been discussions with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates regarding boring under
Highway 10; Medtronic is committing $400,000 on their side, and the City would be committing
$400,000. He added there are connections that need to be made on some roads south of
Highway 10. They could upgrade to well 4, but public works indicated there is sufficient
capacity and there should be no need to upgrade. A feasibility study is needed but should not be
done if the project is not going forward.
Commissioner Zwirn asked how the studies were done. Coordinator Backman replied they
contacted the Met Council and Bonestroo which looked at capacities and provided a written
estimate.
Commissioner Hegland asked about a maintenance study and what would be the cost per year.
Commissioner Zwirn asked if preliminary reports provided any cautions or problems.
Coordinator Backman replied he is unsure what are the soil conditions. He added the borings
have been done but not until the project starts can they tell if there are problems.
Commissioner Scotch stated she assumes the City would be responsible if something goes
wrong.
Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 10
________________________________________________________________________
Mr. McCarty asked for a copy of the report from Bonestroo. He also asked what the casing of
well 4 told and if it was televised. He added in 1982 there was a crack in the well and it was shut
down because the water was becoming contaminated. He noted in terms of the utilities, unless
the ordinance has changed, the company is responsible for connections from the building to the
curb stop and everything else belongs to the City. Director Ericson replied the feasibility study
was done, but he is not prepared to address issues with well 4.
Commissioner Hegland asked, regarding action tonight, is the financial analysis a requirement
for approval. Director Ericson replied based on a review of code and previous cases, he believes
there is sufficient documentation to make a decision and the specific financials are not a
prerequisite to action.
Commissioner Hegland asked who is responsible for the financial part. Director Ericson replied
City Council. Commissioner Hegland stated he disagrees. He added the Commission should not
ignore this part and should prepare this information for the Council.
Commissioner Zwirn stated reminders of Commission responsibility with regard to the
Medtronic project disturb him. Director Ericson replied it is justifiable to confirm what is the
role of the Commission. He added Council has had concerns with Commission comments
regarding items such as the land sale, which strayed from the Commission’s role and
responsibility.
Commissioner Scotch stated she has the right to request information needed on which to base a
decision. She added she hopes the City is not making a bad decision.
Acting Chair Miller closed the cases for public comment at 9:15 p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Scotch. To deny Resolution 815-05, a Resolution Recommending
Approval of a Preliminary Plat Review, Rezoning, and Development Stage Plan Review
Associated with the Medtronic CRM Project; Planning Case No. MA2005-002 and PD2005-002.
Ayes – 2 (Scotch, Zwirn) Nays – 3 (Hull, Meehlhause, Miller) Abstain – 1 (Hegland)
Motion failed.
MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Meehlhause. To approve Resolution 815-05, a Resolution
Recommending Approval of a Preliminary Plat Review, Rezoning, and Development Stage Plan
Review Associated with the Medtronic CRM Project; Planning Case No. MA2005-002 and
PD2005-002.
Ayes – 3 (Hull, Meehlhause, Miller) Nays – 3 (Hegland, Scotch, Zwirn) Motion failed.
Director Ericson asked since the Commission neither approved nor denied the resolution, was
there something that Staff can bring back to the Commission to address concerns.
Mounds View Planning Commission September 21, 2005
Regular Meeting Page 11
________________________________________________________________________
Commissioner Hegland requested a definition of financial analysis and the role of the Planning
Commission. He also requested more information regarding the utility issues. Director Ericson
replied some data could be provided but there is insufficient time to prepare a feasibility study.
Commissioner Zwirn requested a copy of the final signed contract. Director Ericson replied he
would bring that.
______________________________________________________________________________
9. Next Planning Commission Meeting: October 5, 2005
______________________________________________________________________________
10. Adjournment to Agenda Session
______________________________________________________________________________
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Acting Chair Miller adjourned
the meeting at 9:26 p.m.
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
Jim Ericson
Community Development Director
Transcribed by:
Cheryl Felix
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.