2012_0709_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

AttachmentA 160 Northwestern College to determine the extent of their future expansion needs to addressed their 161 increased need for services and demand on the City’s infrastructure. 162 Mr. Paschke advised that Northwestern College had a Master Plan that outlined those details, and if not 163 available online, suggested that Mr. Grefenberg request a copy from the College. 164 Mr. Grefenberg advised that he had looked for such a Master Plan on the College website; however, he 165 was unable to find anything outside the campus, with the Master Plan apparently focused on the 166 College’s purpose, goals and mission, but not addressing the physical plant itself. 167 Member Boguszewski asked the applicant to verify that they had no intent to make any physical 168 modification to the building or site, or access points; and that this request simply allowed for changes in 169 the function of some of the rooms within the existing building. 170 Mr. Lloyd verified that intent, with concurrence by the applicant. 171 At the request of Member Boguszewski, Mr. Humphries addressed current uses or tenants in the building, 172 stating that the first floor was currently leased to Edina Realty; with the other two (2) floors used by 173 Northwestern College employees as offices and conference rooms. 174 Member Boguszewski, based on the applicant representative’s response, noted that this use would not 175 be much different from its current use, with all activities occurring in a building that already existed and 176 rooms within it for a new, but different function. Member Boguszewski observed that this should then in 177 no way materially or negatively affect traffic. 178 At the request of Member Boguszewski, Mr. Humphries advised that, while he was unsure of the number 179 of employees currently occupying the Edina Realty space on a daily basis, there were twenty-five (25) 180 Northwestern College employees on the site. 181 Dr. Ginger Wolgemuth, Northwestern College, Nursing Department Chair 182 Ms. Wolgemuth advised that there would be no increase from current to future employees or students on 183 that site, as most of the students throughout the day would be based at agencies and/or clinics around 184 the metropolitan area. Ms. Wolgemuth further noted that the number of students per square foot was 185 stringently calculated and enforced by the State for average space per student. 186 Member Boguszewski verified with the applicant that the number of people on site in the future may 187 actually be less than currently found, since the students would be involved in simulation labs using hands- 188 on equipment; and that the site would not be used as a campus dormitory, lecture hall or classroom use, 189 but more one-on-one personal labs. 190 Ms. Wolgemuth concurred with Member Boguszewski’s assessment; further noting that the State Board 191 of Nursing requirements were for a 1/8 ratio for clinical and labs, meaning one (1) professor per eight (8) 192 students. 193 Member Olsen asked if there were any tax implications to the City with Edina Realty leaving the space 194 versus this proposed school use. Member Olsen questioned if the school, as a non-profit entity, was 195 paying taxes on this building. 196 Mr. Paschke advised that the building, currently owned by Northwestern College, or any owners of any 197 other office buildings for that matter, could have multiple tenants coming and going freely without having 198 to pay property tax. Mr. Paschke clarified that property taxes were borne by the property owner, and a 199 tenant’s lease was negotiated to cover those costs. From his personal perspective, Mr. Paschke was 200 unable to confirm or deny that this particular site was a property tax payer. 201 Member Olsen opined that this was an important question relative to the use of space; whether this would 202 detrimentally impact the City’s tax base. 203 Member Boguszewski clarified that the ownership of the building was not changing, and if Edina Realty 204 left as a tenant, whether or not their lease covered the cost of any taxes, nothing else was changing with 205 the proposed use. Member Boguszewski noted that, if a non-profit entity used space for its own purposes, 206 and paid nothing for a tax obligation, this proposed use didn’t change their tax status; and opined that 207 either way, it didn’t matter respective to this discussion. 208 Vice Chair Gisselquist concurred with Member Boguszewski’s comments. 209 Mr. Paschke reminded Commissioners that property taxes were not a zoning issue and they were not a 210 function of the Planning Commission or of the City’s Zoning Code. Mr. Paschke stated that such a Page4of6