HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-01-22 HRA Adjourned Meeting AGENDA
Adjourned Meeting of the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority of Edina, Minnesota
Wednesday, January 22, 1975, at 7:30 P.M.
Edina City Hall
' 1. Roll Call.
2. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting, Held January 7, 1975, and adjourned
to January 22, 1975.
3. Recommendations and Reports.
A. Urban Design Contract - ERW.
k
B. Proposed Notification Procedures for Property Acquisitions and Plan
Modifications for the 50th and France Project.
4. Adjournment.
fi
i
i
r1 '
f
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 7, 1975
EDINA CITY HALL
1. Roll Call: Charles W. Freeburg, Chairman
Gary B. Lyall
William F. Greer
James W. Nelson
Staff Present: Greg Luce, Executive Director
Thomas S. Erickson, H.R.A. Attorney
David Schnobrich, Project Planner
Lynnae Nye, Secretary
2. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting, Held Tuesday, December 3, 1974,
and adjourned to Wednesday, December 11, 1974.
Mr. Lyall moved the minutes of the H.R.A. meeting held December 3, 1974, and
adjourned to December 11, 1974, be approved as written. Mr. Greer seconded the
motion and upon roll call the following voted:
Ayes: Mr. Greer, Mr. Freeburg, Mr. Lyall, Mr. Nelson
Nays: None.
Motion carried.
3. Communications.
A. Election of Officers.
Mr. Luce recalled that in 1974 Mr. Freeburg served as Chairman; Mr. Greer, Vice
Chairman; Mr. Rixe, Secretary; and Air. Nelson, Assistant Secretary.
After brief discussion, I4r. Nelson moved the officers elected in 1974 be
retained in their present positions. Mr. Lyall seconded the motion, and upon roll
call the following voted:
Ayes: Mr. Greer, Mr. Freeburg, Air. Lyall, Mr. nelson
Nays: None.
Motion carried.
4. Recommendations.
A. Preliminary Financial Statement for Year Ended 1974.
As requested at a previous meeting, Mr. Luce presented the year end preliminary
financial report. Ile explained that $10,000 was budgeted for personal services , of
which $9,333.91 was spent. Under contractual services, $26,000 was budgeted and
$18,476.97 was spent. Nothing was spent for commodities, although $1,500 was budgeted.
Under central services, $2,700 was budgeted and spent.
C. Contract for Land Survey of 50th and France Project Area.
Mr. Luce explained that in order to proceed from the concept planning stage to
the detailed urban design stage, a land survey of all existing physical details in
the project area must be accomplished. IIe presented a contract proposal and agreement
for land control surveys and topographic and engineering surveys at a maximum fee
1-7-75 H.R.A. Minutes
Page 2
(not to be exceeded without supplemental written agreement) of $14,559. Mr. Don
Ringrose of BRW clarified that under the proposed contract, and pursuant to normal
surveying practices, his firm would identify the property lines as they exist but
would not attempt to resolve ownership disputes where overlaps or gaps exist.
Following discussion regarding the proposed maximum surveying fee, the extent
of the work to be accomplished, and the anticipated cost for the urban design contract,
Mr. Nelson moved the "Proposal and Agreement for Surveying Services with BRW be
executed and the survey undertaken as soon as possible in order to expedite the
detailed urban design stage of the 50th and France project. fir. Greer seconded
the motion, and upon roll call the following voted:
Ayes: fir. Greer, Mr. Freeburg, Mr. Lyall, Mr. Nelson.
Nays : None.
Motion carried.
D. Set Hearing Date for Acquisition and Relocation of Union Oil Station.
Mr. Luce recalled that when the City Council approved the "50th and France
Commercial Area Plan", it suggested that a public hearing he held by the H.R.A. on
the acquisition and relocation of the Union Oil Station at 50th and Halifax for the
purpose of informing all interested and affected parties. He suggested the public
hearing be held on January 22 or 23, 1975, at the Edina City Hall.
Mr. William Pentelovich, representing Union Oil Co. of California, protested the
lack of proper notice to Union Oil of California for the January 7, 1975, meeting
and of the other meetings held during the process of development and approval of the
plans for a redevelopment project for the 50th and France area. He felt it was
premature to set a hearing date until the II.R.A. and Union Oil Co. have tried to
resolve their differences, and suggested instead that dates be set for the H.R.A.
planning staff and consultant to meet with the Union Oil people to discuss "in a
reasonable and conciliatory manner alternative proposals for removing the station
that would satisfy the objections of the planners." He noted that although a hearing
would be the last resort, if a hearing is necessary after meetings are held to discuss
the possibility of keeping the station at its present location, then "we will be glad
to participate in that."
In reply to Mr. Pentelovich, Mr. Erickson clarified the City Council, in approving
the 50th and France Commercial Area Plan, did not make any modifications to the plan
and did not make their approval conditional in any way. The Council was, however,
advised that the statutes allow plan modifications, so modifications can be made.
Lengthy discussion followed. Mr. Pentelovich presented and briefly explained
two alternatives for redesign of the service station driveways, canopy and service
bays "to try to be responsive to what the Union Oil people think are the objections
to having a station at that location." IIe stated the service station has existed
since about 1940, has six full-time and three part-time employees , was completely
rebuilt in 1968 making it one of the newest buildings in the entire area, and, as
the gasoline shortage worsens , will provide a source of gasoline for the 50th and
France area. He presented a petition "with several hundred signatures" of people
opposed to removal of the station. fir. Frank Coe, "one of the station owners",
recalled Mr. Luce had informed him that the H.R.A. could relocate or huv his business.
Mr. Coe stated he "is not interested in selling; the business and relocation is out
r
1-7-75 H.R.A. Minutes
Page3
of the question because there is no place in the immediate area where we could
relocate and maintain our business. If we are relocated out of the immediate area,
we would have to rebuild our business from scratch, and I am violently opposed to
tearing down our business for a parking lot." 11r. Glen Hubbard, the division real
estate representative for Union Oil, pointed out that of the businesses at each
corner of 50th and Halifax, the Union Oil station is the only clear sight corner.
He reiterated the station building is one of the newest structures in the area, and
objected that the principles were not notified when the planning process started.
Mr. J. S. Begg, 5509 Oaklawn Avenue, spoke in favor of retaining the service station
in its present location.
After further discussion, Mr. Freeburg moved a public hearing be held February 4,
1975, at the regular H.R.A. meeting to determine whether the Union Oil station
should be acquired or if the plan should be modified. Mr. Lyall seconded the motion,
and upon roll call the following voted:
Ayes: Mr. Greer, Mr. Freeburg, Mr. Lyall, Mr. Nelson.
Nays: None.
Motion carried.
It was generally agreed that if, as a result of the meetings between the H.R.A.
planning staff and Union Oil, the scheduled February 4th hearing is not necessary,
that hearing would be cancelled.
Lengthy discussion followed during which the method of giving notice to land
owners, tenants, and other interested persons was criticized by several people
present, including Mr. Pentelovich, 11r. Hubbard, and Mr. Coe of Union Oil Company,
Mrs. Charlotte Hauck (5029 Indianola Avenue) , and Mr. Bright Dornblaser (4630 Drexel.
Avenue). The H.R.A. Attorney and Executive Director were instructed by the Authority
to formulate a procedure for notification clarifying who is to be contacted, by
what method, and at what stages, to be considered at a special meeting January 22 ,
1975, at 7:30 P.M. at the Edina City Hall.
B. Estimated Financial Program for 50th and France Project.
Mr. Luce presented the estimated financial program for the 50th and France project,
indicating the estimated costs for acquisition and relocation, street, parking, and
pedestrian improvements and beautification. The estimated total project cost is
$3,296,736; $2,546,736 would be paid by the tax increment and there is a possibility
that other sources of funding (FAU funds, state aid funds, etc. ) will be available
to further reduce the project cost by an estimated $7505000 or more. Figures were
presented showing the increment received if the project were to continue to 1995 and
assuming the bonds will be paid off at 6% interest from 1975 to 1991. He noted that
the maximum costs for public improvements were used, and contingencies have
been figured at 10% of the total project cost.
Discussion was held regarding the financial statements presented, the potential
increase of assessed valuation of commercial properties, the total project cost and
the amount to be assessed to the commercial property owners.
5. Adjournment.
Mr. Lyall moved to continue the 1-7-75 H.R.A. meeting to January 22, 1975, at
1-7-75 H.R.A. Minutes
Page 4
7:30 P.M. at the Edina City Hall. Mr. Greer seconded the motion, and upon roll call
the following voted:
Ayes: Mr. Greer, Mr. Freeburg, Mr. Lyall, Mr. Nelson.
Plays: None.
Motion carried. Meeting adjourned to January 22, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. at the
Edina City Hall.
Respectfully submitted,
�j
Greg Luce, Executive Director
L
1/20/75
Proposed Resolution
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA -
ITHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina, Min-
nesota ("H.R.A.") , by resolution adopted December 11, 1974, and the Edina
City Council ("Council") , by resolution adopted December 16, 1974, did adopt
and approve, respectively, the 50th & France Commercial Area Plan dated
DecembeL S, 1974 ("Plan") ; and
jTHEREAS, the Plan describes a Project Area and provides for acqui-
sition of parcels of land within the Project Area; and
TMEREAS, the H.R.A. has made every effort to obtain planning
participation by all parties concerned with and having an interest in the
Project Area, and to inform and advise all such parties of the H.R.A. 's
plans for the Project Area, and, in addition, has given all notices required
by law in connection with the adoption and approval of the Plan; and
ITHEREAS, the H.R.A. desires to continue to give all persons who
may own or have an interest in property within the Project Area which is pro-
posed to be acquired, reasonable opportunity to be heard concerning the Plan
and its effect on such property, and any proposal such persons may have for
modification of the Plan as it relates to such property.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Edina,
Minnesota, does hereby resolve that, in connection with any acquisition by
the H.R.A. of land or buildings, or any interest therein, within the Project
Area, the following procedure be used:
1. Prior to any action being taken for any such acquisition, the
Executive Director shall give written, mailed notice to the owners of the
property or interest to be acquired, as such owners are shown on, and at the
addresses shown on, the records of the Assessor of the City of Edina. A copy
of such notice shall also be sent to all persons in possession (other than by
means of parked vehicles) of the property to be acquired, as can best be determined
by a physical inspection and inquiry then to be made by the Executive Director.
The notice shall state that the Plan contemplates acquisition of their property
by the H.R.A. and shall give the extent of such acquisition, that the Plan is
able to be modified, and that if the recipient of the notice wishes to discuss
the proposed acquisition or any modification to the Plan for the purposes of
eliminating, or changing the extent of, the proposed acquisition, then the
recipient should communicate with the Executive Director within ten (10)
days after receipt of the notice, to set up a meeting to discuss such
modification.
2. lf, within the 10-day period, a meeting is requested, the Execu-
tive Director shall meet with the requesting party to discuss the acquisition
and any proposed modifications. The Executive Director also shall give at
least five (5) days' written notice to a representative of the Citizens
Advisory Committee and the 50th & France Conmercial Steering Committee of
such meeting, so that a representative of those committees may attend and
join in the discussions.
3. The Executive Director shall report the results of such meeting
or meetings to the H.R.A. at its next regular meeting following the last of
such meetings. If the Executive Director recommends that a modification be
made to the Plan, then the H.R.A. , at such meeting, shall set a date for a
public hearing on the modification. If the Executive Director recommends,
as a result of such meeting or meetings, that no modification be made to
the Plan, but the person or persons requesting the meeting with the Executive
Director pursuant to paragraph 1 above, requests a hearing before the H.R.A.
to propose a modification of the Plan, then the H.R.A. shall set a date for a
public hearing on the modification. . The hearing shall b` set for a date:
within forty-five (45) days of such regular meeting of the H.R.A.
The Executive Director shall give written, mailed notice to all persons who
attended any one or more of the meetings held pursuant to paragraph 2 above,
at least ten (10) days before the hearing date, advising them of the public
hearing and the proposed modification. Also, a notice of the date, time,
place, and proposed modification to be discussed at the meeting shall be
published in the Edina Sun at least ten (10) days before _ the hearing date.
4. At the public hearing, the oral and written views of all interested
persons shall be heard, and the H.R.A. shall makes its decision on whether to
modify the Plan at the same or a specified future meeting of the H.R.A.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the failure to follow or comply with
I
any one or more of the procedures above established shall not in any way
affect or invalidate any action or inaction of the H.R.A. otherwise taken or
done in compliance with applicable statutory requirements and procedures,
it being understood that the foregoing procedures are not required by any
applicable statutory requirements or procedures, but are being implemented
by the H.R.A. for improved communication and to aid the H.R.A. in making
decisions concerning the implementation or modification of the Plan.
-3-