CC_Minutes_2012_0521 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,May 21,2012 Page 34 Twin Lakes. Councilmember Willmus explained his rationale in asking the question based on whether or not this 160,000 square foot retail center would skew the overall use within Twin Lakes. Due Process Concerns with Revisions to the Development Agreement Mayor Roe asked that staff respond to concerns regarding due process with re- visions provided by staff this afternoon related to the Development Agreement. Mr. Trudgeon advised that financial information had been included in the in- formation released with the draft Development Agreement included as part of the agenda packet materials, and had not been changed with the revisions re- leased today. As previously noted in staffs presentation, the revisions were minor in nature and basically consisted of typographical and grammatical cor- rections, and additional exhibits as supporting documents referenced in the body of the Agreement. Mr. Trudgeon advised that the summary of the Development Agreement and a significant portion of the exhibits were included in the packet available and/or distributed last Thursday. Councilmember Pust noted that the total dollars were included,just not the de- tailed breakdown. At approximately 9:59 p.m., Johnson moved, Willmus seconded, extending the meeting curfew to 10:30 p.m. Roll Call Ayes: Pust; Willmus; McGehee; Johnson; and Roe. Nays: None. Mayor Roe deferred response to the office versus retail portion until the City Council discussion. Traffic Mitigation at Fairview Avenue and County Road D Mayor Roe asked City Engineer Bloom to respond to the comment that this de- velopment did not trigger mitigation for the Fairview Avenue and County Road D intersection and that its service level would be maintained at level "f." Ms. Bloom responded that, while not having that information available at this time, she could verify that there was no change indicated at that intersection. Ms. Bloom noted that there were a number of intersections within the communi- ty currently rated at "d" or "f' service levels today; and the Wal-Mart develop- ment did not trigger any additional mitigation based on projected impacts to the intersection. Ms. Bloom referenced a letter addressed to her from MnDOT dated April 12, 2012, addressing the projected 6,000 vehicles per hour to Wal-Mart. Quoting directly from that correspondence, Ms. Bloom noted that I-35W carried greater