Laserfiche WebLink
102 recent reconstruction of County Road C in 2005/06 had occurred based on the design with Twin <br />~~ Lakes Parkway in place as a reliever to eliminate use of County Road C by this development <br /> area; and the current stresses indicated at County Road C and Fairview and County Road C and <br />105 Cleveland, with the delay in construction of the Parkway. <br />106 Bake Baker, McGough Development, McGough Development, 8170 33rd Avenue S, <br />107 Bloomington, MN <br />108 Mr. Baker concurred with staff's presentation and recommendations and availed himself and <br />109 McGough staff and consultants in attendance to respond to questions of the Commission or <br />11 o public. <br />111 Chair Bakeman questioned if the applicant was amenable to flexibility in their design allowing for <br />112 future transit stops. <br />113 Mr. Baker advised that McGough would welcome any kind of transit, including use of the trail and <br />11a sidewalk system and access points, as indicated by their discussions with the Parks and <br />11 ~ Recreation Commission, specifically immediately west of the development site. Mr. Baker added <br />116 that future bus stop locations along Twin Lakes Parkway would be strongly encouraged. <br />117 Commissioner Wozniak noted the proposed parking structure(s) and stalls, taking up substantial <br />118 surface space, especially on this prime site next to the lake; and questioned whether parking <br />119 calculations were valid. <br />12o Mr. Baker noted the developer's preference for less parking, dependent on whether amulti-tenant <br />121 low rise office tenant, or a corporate tenant was found; however, noted the need to respond to <br />122 market-driven demands and realities and the request for flexibility in order to respond to that <br />123 market. Mr. Baker advised that no one wanted to build more parking that needed, but the <br />12.4 developer needed to make the property marketable. Mr. Baker noted that this was a common <br />125 challenge for a developer in providing office space and the market place driving the demand. Mr. <br />126 Baker referenced studies of other projects of the developer as precedents, with the parking ration <br />' of 2.5 to 3 cars/1,000 square feet of office as the current demands, but perceived needs of 4 to 5 <br /> cars per 1,000 square feet. Mr. Baker assured Commissioners that, once a significant corporate <br />129 tenant was identified, negotiations would proceed to determine if less than current market <br />130 demands could be accommodated and hopefully assisted to some degree by the dynamics of the <br />131 ever-changing transit infrastructure in the Twin Cities area. <br />132 Public Comment <br />13'u Eric Borg, Minneapolis, Reporter for MpIs.ISt. Paul Business Journal <br />134 Mr. Borg asked if breaking ground would be dependent on securing a corporate tenant. <br />135 Mr. Baker responded that the developer would first clarify that the site was developable, and then <br />13C would go to the market to seek tenants. <br />1 37 Gary Grefenberg, 91 Mid Oaks Lane <br />138 Mr. Grefenberg opined that he had reservations with this proposal, specific to the spirit of urban <br />139 design principles adopted for the redevelopment area, especially since the developer would be <br />140 seeking public assistance through tax increment financing (TIF). Mr. Grefenberg further opined <br />141 that, while he was impressed with staff's thorough review of the applicant's proposal, the <br />1a2 alternative professional office building could be more easily adopted to the site. Mr. Grefenberg <br />143 questioned if parking structures, or seeking higher density office users, were the best use of this <br />144 prime property and lake vista. Mr. Grefenberg recognized that the proposal was conceptual at <br />14.5 this point and that a landscaping plan had yet to be developed and negotiated, but opined that <br />14(~ park users should be screened from the parking ramps, and that the perspective of the park users <br />147 should be considered. Mr. Grefenberg asked that, as the project proceeded, that substantial <br />148 landscape details included screening and that more strict adherence to the urban design <br />149 principles be applied. <br />15o While not speaking directly in opposition to the proposal, Mr. Grefenberg further opined that <br />151 perhaps more patience was appropriate given the value of this land, more care and persistence <br /> to the archived and broader urban design principles and value of this specific park continue to be <br /> exercised by staff and the Planning Commission. Mr. Grefenberg spoke in appreciation of the <br />154 sidewalk and trail connections throughout the project to the lake, opining that if the developer <br />