Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, March 05, 2008 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />? <br /> Construction of Prior Avenue as two lanes southbound into County Road C and one <br />northbound lane into Twin Lakes Parkway at County Road C and Prior Avenue, which would <br />include installation of a traffic signal. <br />? <br /> Optimized signal timing at all signalized intersections <br />Discussion included traffic study assumptions and the cumulative process from now, the year <br />2011 (anticipated one year after full build-out for McGough project), 2016 as half-way mark, and <br />2030 anticipated for full development; current economic and transit issues and their limited <br />impacts locally, regionally, and industry-wide to-date, with future potential for multi-model and/or <br />high-occupancy concepts; travel demand management practices and implementation encouraged <br />for employers for employees (i.e., gas cards, car pooling, bus passes, exercise facilities, or other <br />incentives); and the long delay in development of the Northeast Diagonal Rapid Transit system. <br />Ms. Bloom indicated that, to-date, the Metropolitan Council had provided no commitment to add <br />additional bus routes for the area, specifically east/west bound. Ms. Bloom further noted that the <br />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 />Cleveland, with the delay in construction of the Parkway. <br />rd <br />Bake Baker, McGough Development, McGough Development, 8170 33 Avenue S, <br />Bloomington, MN <br />Mr. Baker concurred with staff’s presentation and recommendations and availed himself and <br />McGough staff and consultants in attendance to respond to questions of the Commission or <br />public. <br />Chair Bakeman questioned if the applicant was amenable to flexibility in their design allowing for <br />future transit stops. <br />Mr. Baker advised that McGough would welcome any kind of transit, including use of the trail and <br />sidewalk system and access points, as indicated by their discussions with the Parks and <br />Recreation Commission, specifically immediately west of the development site. Mr. Baker added <br />that future bus stop locations along Twin Lakes Parkway would be strongly encouraged. <br />Commissioner Wozniak noted the proposed parking structure(s) and stalls, taking up substantial <br />surface space, especially on this prime site next to the lake; and questioned whether parking <br />calculations were valid. <br />Mr. Baker noted the developer’s preference for less parking, dependent on whether a multi-tenant <br />low rise office tenant, or a corporate tenant was found; however, noted the need to respond to <br />market-driven demands and realities and the request for flexibility in order to respond to that <br />market. Mr. Baker advised that no one wanted to build more parking than needed, but the <br />developer needed to make the property marketable. Mr. Baker noted that this was a common <br />challenge for a developer in providing office space and the market place driving the demand. Mr. <br />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 />tenant was identified, negotiations would proceed to determine if less than current market <br />demands could be accommodated and hopefully assisted to some degree by the dynamics of the <br />ever-changing transit infrastructure in the Twin Cities area. <br />Public Comment <br />Eric Borg, Minneapolis, Reporter for Mpls./St. Paul Business Journal <br />Mr. Borg asked if breaking ground would be dependent on securing a corporate tenant. <br />Mr. Baker responded that the developer would first clarify that the site was developable, and then <br />would go to the market to seek tenants. <br />Gary Grefenberg, 91 Mid Oaks Lane <br />Mr. Grefenberg opined that he had reservations with this proposal, specific to the spirit of urban <br />design principles adopted for the redevelopment area, especially since the developer would be <br /> <br />