Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-27-08-08 City of Lakeville Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes May 27, 2008 Marion Conference Room, City Hall Members Present: Comms. Matasosky, Vlasak, Emond, Erickson, Schubert, Tushie, Brantly, Smith, Pogatchnik, Stanfield, Ex-officio member Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Todd Bornhauser, Ex-officio member City Administrator Steve Mielke. Members Absent: Ex-officio member Mayor Holly Dahl Others Present: David Olson, Community & Economic Development Director; Adam Kienberger, Economic Development Specialist, Daryl Morey, Planning Director. 1. Calf Meeting to Order Chair Matasosky called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. in the Marion Conference .Room of City Hall, 20195 Holyoke Avenue, Lakeville, Minnesota. 2. Approve April 22, 2008 Meeting Minutes Motion 08.06 Comms. Tushie/Erickson moved to approve the minutes of the April 22, 2008 meeting as presented. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Introduction of New EDC Member Chair Matasosky introduced new EDC member Glenn Stanfield. 4. Discussion on Possible Sign Ordinance Amendments The City Council recently directed the Planning Commission to review the current Zoning Ordinance requirements pertaining to commercial sign regulations along the I-35 freeway corridor. The Council's request was initiated as the .result of a request for a variance from Comfort Inn motel to install a 60 foot tall freestanding sign on their property. The City Council has tabled action on this variance request in order to receive input from the Planning Commission on a possible ordinance amendment. The current maximum freestanding sign height allowed in the freeway corridor area is 30 feet except for commercial uses that have more than 100,000 square feet of Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes May 27 2008 buildirYg floor area. In those situations, the maximum height for a freestanding sign is 50 feet. Daryl Morey reviewed a memo from the Planning Department that responded to the Planning Commission's direction on this issue. The. memo includes a summary of commercial sign regulations for thirteen Metro area suburbs. Comm. Smith stated that the Comfort Inn sign variance issue was mainly due to the low elevation of the property and the City should do what it can to promote business. Comm. Tushie asked if there was a topography provision in the current ordinance. Mr. Morey responded that there wasn't but that the Freeway Corridor District already allows taller and larger signs that what is allowed in the C-3 zoning district. Comm.- Brantly asked if it was possible to consider sign heights from a reference -level of the freeway. Mr. Morey replied that the sign heights might seem fine from the freeway level but could look extremely tall from the ground level adjacent to the business. Comm. Emond added that when people travel they are typically looking for signage for their destination. Comm. Smith asked how far below the freeway the Comfort Inn property is. Chair Matasosky responded that it is about sixteen to twenty feet below the freeway grade. Comm. Tushie noted that Lakeville's C-3 district sign .height of twenty feet seems kind of short for some areas. He then asked if electronic signage was being revisited in the sign ordinance changes. Mr. Mielke said that electronic signage might be revisited in the future, but not as a part of the current possible sign ordinance amendment. Mr. Mielke asked what the tree heights are surrounding the Comfort Inn. Mr. Morey responded that the Comfort Inn wants signage that is above both current and future tree heights on their site. Comm. Vlasak asked about locating a sign on top of a berm to add some additional height to what is currently allowed. 2 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes May 2~, 2008 Mr. Morey responded that that is possible, but the berm would have to meet ordinance slope requirements. Comm. Smith noted that if an ordinance amendment were to base sign height on relative freeway elevation, places like Target might actually have to have shorter signage. Comm. Pogatchnik added that there is still a lot of undeveloped C-3 property located within the Freeway Corridor District and we need to be aware of that. Comm. Erickson asked what the current Comfort Inn sign height is. Mr. Morey replied that it is thirty feet. Gomm. Pogatchnik stated that the existing requirements must have been put in place for a reason when they were originally adopted. Mr. Olson added that the Holiday Inn & Suites and Cracker Barrel both have signs from previous variances granted to them. He continued by saying that the Comfort Inn wishes to be visible from both north and southbound traffic and that over time, things such as the freeway ramps and interchanges can change. An example is the new County Road 70 bridge which will be 5 feet higher than the current bridge. Comm. Pogatchnik asked if the City has ever lost a business prospect due to our sign requirements. Mr. Olson responded that there haven't been any we are aware of, but Best Buy would not have located where they did if they weren't a part of the Timbercrest PUD and able to co-locate on the SuperTarget sign. Comm. Tushie asked if Comfort Inn has negotiated with adjacent businesses to co- locate asign. Chair Matasosky said that Comfort lnn approached MN Tile but they did not want to co-locate a new sign. Comm. Tushie suggested the possibility of allowing for sign "clustering" in certain areas along the freeway for area businesses. Mr. Mielke asked if other communities look at the type of business for their sign requirements. Mr. Morey responded that they don't with the exception of Lino Lakes, which allows a taller sign for motor fuel facilities. 3 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes May 27, 2008 Comm. Tushie asked about locating a sign on the roof of the building. Mr. Morey responded that roof signs are not allowed. Comm. Tushie stated that he thinks property elevation should be considered in the sign ordinance. Comm. Smith also stated that the grade of the freeway should be considered in the sign ordinance. Comm. Pogatchnik added that whatever is done, to be careful about the precedent set for all future development along the freeway. Comm. Brandy asked about considering the elevations of the undeveloped parcels along the freeway. Mr. Morey added that the Planning Commission will also consider business use as part of any revisions to the sign ordinance. Mr. Mielke cautioned that the current Best Buy sign can be seen by some residences along Lake Marion and he has received some complaints. If higher signage is allowed, we will likely hear from the residential community. Comm. Tushie restated the idea of considering sign clusters for the undeveloped areas along the freeway. 5. Update on Lakeville Transit Service Agreement Mr. Olson and Mr. Mielke provided an update on the approved transit service agreement and the next steps for Lakeville. On May 5, 2008 the City Council approved an agreement with the Metropolitan Council that will result in the construction of park and ride facilities on both I-35 and Cedar Avenue in 2009 which was consistent with the recommendation of the EDC. A copy of the presentation that City Administrator Steve Mielke provided to the City Council on this issue is attached. The agreement (copy attached) also provides for an additional northbound lane being constructed on I-35 from the I-35 split to the Burnsville Parkway. This agreement is contingent on approval of transit operating funds from the County Transit Investment Board (CTIB) which will be allocating the new 1/4 cent sales tax that was approved by the State Legislature and the Dakota County Board. Comm. Brandy asked if there was a chance the CTIB wouldn't approve the deal. 4 r Economic Development Commission Meefing Minutes May 27, 2008 Mr. Mielke responded that it would be unlikely as Lakeville needs to be in the Transit Taxing District for the UPA money to be utilized. Comm. Erickson commented that with the cost of fuel continuing to rise, transit is a good thing. Comm. Tushie added that the transit will be good for the area. He asked if services will be increased in Lakeville as demand increases. Mr. Mielke responded that services could be increased as demand increases and funding is available.. Comm. Emond asked if the Chamber of Commerce opposition to Lakeville entering the Transit Taxing District was alleviated. by the City Council requiring the City tax levy be reduced by an amount equal to the new Met Council transit tax. Todd Bornhauser replied that it was. Mr. Mielke added that the biggest part of the transit proposal is likely the addition of the third lane in Burnsville. This will help many more commuters than just those who ride the bus. 6. Review on Legislative Actions Regarding Economic Development Adam Kienberger reviewed an update from EDAM on the recently concluded legislative session. The 2008 Legislature. adjourned after reaching a deal among legislative leaders and the Governor that resolves the $935 million budget deficit. The Governor remained .steadfast in protecting the JOBZ program. While the program remains intact in the 2008 tax bill, its term was not extended and additional restrictions were added. EDAM was successful in increasing thresholds for grants and loans under the business subsidy law to $150,000. This threshold also applies to the public hearing requirements. Some reporting will still be required at the current law lower thresholds, and projects will still need to meet job and wage criteria. Mr. Mielke .noted that in this legislative session the budget. deficit was fixed only by cutting one-time dollars. He indicated that long-term the State budget deficit will continue to grow and remain a concern. 5 F Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes May 27, 2008 Mr. Bornhauser added that the fiscal disparities proposal was not approved this session. Mr. Mielke elaborated by explaining fiscal disparities and that the proposal for the Mall of America was defeated. He also added that while Lakeville is currently on the benefitting side of fiscal disparities, based on our growth Lakeville will likely become a payer into the system sometime in the future, 7. Director's Report Mr. Olson reviewed the Director's Report. 8. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Attested to: Adam Kienberger, R. T. Brantly, Secretar Economic Development Specialist 6