7.1.
CC Regular Session
- Meeting Date:
- 06/10/2014
- Submitted For:
- Patrick Brama
- By:
- Patrick Brama, Administrative Services
Information
Title:
15153 Nowthen Blvd Property Development: Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application
Purpose/Background:
PURPOSE OF CASE
Consider SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow for _____________ on the Subject Property.
DETAILED BACKGROUND
(Subject Property, study group process, development process, public input, general, etc.)
Please see the Findings Report included in this case: pages 1-8 and several Appendix items.
CASE BACKGROUND
In some form, this case has been reviewed by the City’s Economic Development Authority (EDA) and City Council a combined nine times from October 2012 to June 2014. For a record of case presentations and minutes, please visit the project webpage: cityoframsey.com/formerrmc.
This case was reviewed by the EDA on May 8, 2014; at which time, a unanimous recommendation was made to the City Council: Submit an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow for both residential and data center land uses on the Subject Property. The EDA made this recommendation with the intent of stipulating a timeline/sunset date to market the Subject Property for a data center development (for example, 18 or 24 months).
Consider SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow for _____________ on the Subject Property.
(A) Residential landuse only
(B) Residential and data center landuses
(B) Residential and data center landuses
NOTES: this application will also need to be approved by the Metropolitan Council. Upon completion of that process, the City would need to update its official controls (Zoning Code and Official Zoning Map). Included in your case is a detailed process timeline.
The City Council should concentrate their conversation on this specific application only. The Council should not indicate their final position on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and/or a Zoning Amendment. Both processes require due process.
The City Council should concentrate their conversation on this specific application only. The Council should not indicate their final position on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and/or a Zoning Amendment. Both processes require due process.
DETAILED BACKGROUND
(Subject Property, study group process, development process, public input, general, etc.)
Please see the Findings Report included in this case: pages 1-8 and several Appendix items.
CASE BACKGROUND
In some form, this case has been reviewed by the City’s Economic Development Authority (EDA) and City Council a combined nine times from October 2012 to June 2014. For a record of case presentations and minutes, please visit the project webpage: cityoframsey.com/formerrmc.
This case was reviewed by the EDA on May 8, 2014; at which time, a unanimous recommendation was made to the City Council: Submit an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow for both residential and data center land uses on the Subject Property. The EDA made this recommendation with the intent of stipulating a timeline/sunset date to market the Subject Property for a data center development (for example, 18 or 24 months).
Notification:
Notification of this meeting was made via direct mail to 250 surrounding property owners. Included on the project webpage are all letters sent to the public regarding this discussion: cityoframsey.com/formerrmc.
Observations/Alternatives:
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Attached to this case is an updated feasibility analysis that compares two data center development scenarios to a single family residential development. The feasibility analysis draws two major conclusions: (1) from an annual property tax revenue perspective, a data center development is considerably more beneficial to the City than a single family residential development; and (2) from a one-time land transaction perspective, it is anticipated a residential development is marginally more beneficial to the City than a data center development.
It should be noted, a few unmeasurable variables will have an effect on this feasibility report: i.e. fiscal disparities, required land sale discount for a data center development, required land sale discount for a residential development and market trends/changes.
PUBLIC INPUT/DEVELOPMENT CONCERNS
Over the past 18 months the City has taken in a large quantity of public input regarding the future development of the Subject Property. A detailed account of public input can be referenced in the attached Findings Report; pages 5-42 (summary: pages 5-13).
Included in the Findings Report is a detailed breakdown of information shared and input received for each specific issue identified by the public (Noise, Site Layout, Building Design, Spot Zoning, Safety, Traffic, Land Values). Each issue is broken down into the following categories:
NOTES: Staff will walk through a detailed PowerPoint presentation of this case at the Council Meeting. Also, attached to this case are comments from Council Member Tossey; which were intended to be read at the May 20 Council Worksession.
Attached to this case is an updated feasibility analysis that compares two data center development scenarios to a single family residential development. The feasibility analysis draws two major conclusions: (1) from an annual property tax revenue perspective, a data center development is considerably more beneficial to the City than a single family residential development; and (2) from a one-time land transaction perspective, it is anticipated a residential development is marginally more beneficial to the City than a data center development.
It should be noted, a few unmeasurable variables will have an effect on this feasibility report: i.e. fiscal disparities, required land sale discount for a data center development, required land sale discount for a residential development and market trends/changes.
PUBLIC INPUT/DEVELOPMENT CONCERNS
Over the past 18 months the City has taken in a large quantity of public input regarding the future development of the Subject Property. A detailed account of public input can be referenced in the attached Findings Report; pages 5-42 (summary: pages 5-13).
Included in the Findings Report is a detailed breakdown of information shared and input received for each specific issue identified by the public (Noise, Site Layout, Building Design, Spot Zoning, Safety, Traffic, Land Values). Each issue is broken down into the following categories:
- Summarized description of issue
- Analytic information
- Potential mitigation techniques
- Qualitative public input/feedback
- Quantitative public input/feedback.
- Appendix of this Findings Report is raw information utilized in each public meeting; supplemental information submitted by the public; and answers to questions from the public.
NOTES: Staff will walk through a detailed PowerPoint presentation of this case at the Council Meeting. Also, attached to this case are comments from Council Member Tossey; which were intended to be read at the May 20 Council Worksession.
Funding Source:
This process has been captured under 'normal staff duties' of the Administration and Community Development Departments.
Recommendation:
Staff believes a significant level of public input and analytical information has been collected in relation to the potential development of the Subject Property for a data center user; and would not recommend additional research or public input processes take place. Staff recommends the Council take action tonight to submit an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Staff would confidently support Council action for either alternative outlined in this case.
Action:
Submit an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow for _____________ on the old municipal center site.
(A) Residential land use only
(B) Residential and data center land uses
(B) Residential and data center land uses
Attachments
- Findings Report (OMC Study Group)
- Feasibility Analysis (updated 06202014)
- Site Concept Maps
- Timeline (next steps in process)
- Site Location Map
- Project Website
- Councilmember Tossey Comments (05192014)
Form Review
| Inbox | Reviewed By | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Brian Hagen | Jo Thieling | 06/04/2014 05:02 PM |
| Diana Lund | Diana Lund | 06/05/2014 01:16 PM |
| Kurt Ulrich | Kurt Ulrich | 06/05/2014 04:28 PM |
- Form Started By:
- Patrick Brama
- Started On:
- 06/04/2014 08:24 AM
- Final Approval Date:
- 06/05/2014