Laserfiche WebLink
436 <br />MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE <br />EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY/CITY COUNCIL <br />JUNE 15, 1987 <br />A joint meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City <br />Council was convened to consider concurrently an amendment to the Southeast Edina <br />Redevelopment Plan. <br />required. <br />Answering rollcall were Commissioners/Members Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner and <br />Courtney. <br />Action was taken by the HRA and the Council individually as <br />I MINUTES of the H.R.A. Meeting of June 1, 1987 were approved as submitted by motion <br />of Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Turner. <br />Ayes: <br />Motion carried. <br />Kelly, Richards, Smith:' Turner, Courtney <br />PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON AMENDMENTS TO SOUTHEAST EDINA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN: <br />AMENDMENTS APPROVED. Gordon Hughes, Executive D.irector of the HRA, recalled that <br />on April 6, 1987 staff provided the Council with an update on the Hedberg <br />property. At that time the Council took action that instructed and directed staff <br />to: 1) initiate the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the site, 2) initiate <br />an amendment to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan to indude the vacant land <br />in southeast Edina not presently in the tax increment district, and 3) initiate <br />studies to create a new tax increment district. <br />process has commenced and that the preparation work has been done. The amendments <br />to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan have been prepared for the Council's <br />consideration and notice was published that this would be a public hearing to take <br />testimony on the amendments in order to include the rest of the vacant land in <br />that area. Mr. Hughes presented a schematic of .the southeast Edina area showing <br />the land currently within the tax increment redevelopment plan and the land that <br />is proposed to be added. <br />Member Kelly commented that when the Council took the action in April she had <br />stated that she felt the Council should have as-philosophic discussion as to how <br />the proposed development: of the Hedberg -property would affect Edina and whether it <br />meets the City's mission statement. <br />presentation of the proposed development andnow are considering an amendment to <br />the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan which in:the introduction, Section A, is <br />very specific as to what is to happen to this piece of property. She said she <br />felt this has preempted the discussion that she felt the Council should have, that <br />she could not approve the amendment because of the specific language as to how it <br />should be developed. Member Turner suggested that this is the time for the <br />Council to talk through the issues and to see if the objectives in the original <br />plan are still valid for this piece of property. <br />required would simply add property to the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Plan or if <br />it would also include approving a financing method. Mr. Hughes explained that the <br />action required would increase the sphere of influence of the HRA in southeast <br />Edina. <br />contracts covering at least 50% of the land prior to establishing a tax increment <br />district; so the escablishment of the district actually would occur if and when <br />the City reaches an agreement with the developers. <br />pointed out that the Statement of Need says we need affordable housing for the <br />elderly and persons of low and moderate income and that the HRA is desirous of <br />promoting the development of housing for the elderly and other persons in the <br />City. <br />have met our needs for subsidized housing for low and moderate:income people. <br />added that the Edinborough project has not stood the test of .time, that Edina has <br />met these needs better than other communities in the metropolikan area and that <br />she did not think this is the direction Edina should take now. She stated that <br />she has not been convinced by the community that they want her, as a Council <br />Member representing them, to approve another subsidized project. Member Smith <br />commented that this is the last commercial area in Edina. .He said he felt the <br />property will be developed regardless and &hat =he question is should the City get <br />control over the area and is this the way to do it. Manager.Rosland submitted <br />that this 100 acres is the last remaining property in Edina of any size and scope <br />and that the suggested process will enable the City to get a handle on the project <br />and develop it other than in five or six acre parcels. <br />project is patterned after Edinborough there will be a subsidy for the housing <br />part of the project. <br />to control development and that this is another tool but it is not available until <br />certain steps are taken, one of which is to add the property to the Southeast <br />Edina Redevelopment Plan. <br />Council and the HRA must act upon before any aid is given. That would be: 1) <br />creation of the tax increment- district, and 2) approval of the redevelopment <br />contract. <br />that she has difficulty in agreeing to the amendment because of the Statement of <br />Need. <br />office, is needed to create a tax increment district and whether the housing or <br />the park could be left out. Member Richards commented that that is one <br />Mr. Hughes said that the EIS <br />Considerable discussion followed summarized as follows. <br />Since then the Council has seen a <br />She then asked if the action <br />The law provides that the HRA would have to enter into redevelopment <br />Continuing, Member Kelly <br />She said she felt that statement deserves alot of debate; that we really <br />She <br />He said that if the <br />Attorney Erickson explained that there are tools available <br />There are other steps that must be taken and which the <br />He said those would be the difficult ones. Member Kelly reiterated <br />Member Smith asked if the multiple land use, i.e. housing, retail and