Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/07/2003

Home

conditional use permit was first issued~ the Economic Development Authority has identified a Critical Blight Redevelopment Area in the vicinity of 141st Avenue NW., Basalt Street NW and Azurite Street NW, which includes the St. Paul Terminals property. The City has ordered plans and specifications to install municipal water, sanitary sewer, and street improvements on 141st Avenue to spark redevelopment of this blighted area. In addition, the conditional use permit was issued to Lots 1 and 2, Block 4, Gateway North Industrial Park Plat 2; Lot 2 has been sold. The Planning Commission formed findings of fact and recommended that the City Council deny the request for extension. In lieu of the fact that the proposed recycling facility has not developed in two years, City staff recommended that City Council eliminate the use restrictions (recycling) on this property by denying the request for extension of the conditional use permit. Bradley Martinson, Attorney Representing St. Paul Terminals, Inc., stated that he felt that there had been a failure of communication on the issue. In June of 2002 when the last extension was granted Mr. Shot, his son and City staff members met to discuss future plans for the property. At that time Mr. Shot was discussing the idea of building a state of the art recycling center and looking for any help the City could offer, Along with that they discussed a possible land swap. That discussion'did not get very far off the ground, which had to do with the economy and St. Paul Terminals. After those discussions Mr. Shot did get in touch with an Engineering firm to draft a sketch of how the facility might work if the land swap were to occur. Obviously the development of the facility takes money and at the time .St. Paul Terminals did not have the money and still does not. Mr. Shot indicated to him that those discussion ended when the City stated that the ball was in their court, meaning the City. Since that time Mr. Shot entered into discussions with Tom Sauter and who expressed interest in purchasing Lot 2 and that transaction did occur. Nothing ever came of the discussions with the City and at the end of April of this year Mr. Martinson became nervous because the extension was about to expire. On April 29th Mr. Martinson wrote a~ letter to the City discussing the need for the extension to allow for the continuation of discussions for developing the property. The facility has been receiving some product on the site. In regards to the fence Mr. Shot has indicated that if the fence is completed as required as part of the permit might negatively impact the development of the property. The next communication they received was a request by the City for additional time to act on the extension request so the permit was extended to July 17th. On June 25th he received a letter from the City stating that the Planning Commission was conducting a public hearing on the issue on June 25th and that staff was prepared to make a verbal recommendation. He contacted the City to inform them that Mr. Shot was not able to attend nor was he. During that conversation he was told that staff was going to be recommending denial of the extension. He did submit a letter to the City requesting that the extension be granted for several reasons, which he reviewed. Prior to the Planning Commission that is the first anyone associated with St. Paul Terminals heard anything about the area being a redevelopment area. Mr. Martinson stated that he was present to request that the Council disregard the denial recommendation by the Planning Commission out of fairness to the property owner. Councilmember Elvig inquired if the property was located in a TIF District. City Administrator Norman replied yes. P80 City Council/July 8, 2003 Page 20 of 30