Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19870706_joint451 MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY/CITY COUNCIL JULY 6, 1987 I F cr) m I Q: m I I A 'joint meeting of the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the City Council was convened to consider concurrently the Final Development Plan for Cineplex Odeon Corporation (Edina Theatre, 3911 W. 50th Street). Action was taken by the HRA and the Council individually as required. Answering rollcall were Commissioners/Members Richards, Smith, Turner and Courtney. MINUTES of the Joint HRA/Council Meeting of June 15, 1987 were approved as submitted by motion of Commissioner/Member Turner, seconded by Commissioner/Member Smith. Ayes: Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. 8' (Commissioner/Member Kelly entered the meeting at this point.) . PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CINEPLEX ODEON CORPORATION (EDINA THEATRE) CONTINUED TO 8/3/87. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved and ordered placed on file. the Edina Theatre, 3911 West 50th Street, located on the south side of West 50th Street and west of France Avenue. The owners, Cineplex Odeon Corporation, have submitted a request to allow reconstruction for a larger theatre auditorium to increase the seating capacity from its present 841 seats to 1400 seats and to increase the number of screens from three to four. He pointed out that the theater property has approximately 87 feet of frontage on West 50th Street, including three existing shops and the existing theatre lobby. would leave the three existing stores and lobby space in place as they exist today. The redevelopment of the property would occur approximately 36 feet back from the sidewalk on West 50th Street. Mr. Larsen explained that under the proposal the theatres would be stacked; there would be two theatres containing 419 seats and two theatres containing 281 seats. The exterior of the proposed building would be face brick to match the brick in the existing tower; the paint on areas along the existing store fronts would be removed, and the existing tower and marquee would remain as they are presently. The building the theatre is proposing for the property would be four stories and a total of 48 feet in height and would be 16 feet taller than the existing building. The proposal asks for a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.82, of which 1.68 would be for theatre use including the lobby. for the existing stores. allows a FAR of 1.5 in the PC-2 District. The proponents contend that this FAR is required if they are to save the retail spaces and still meet their design objectives. Mr. Larsen commented that the theatre is located within the 50th and France Tax Increment District. The theatre relies on public parking provided in the ramps in the area. The Zoning Ordinance allows for the re-use or reconstruction of existing buildings in the district without providing additional off-street parking. The Ordinance provides, however, that expansions to existing uses must include additional off-street parking in conformance with Ordinance requirements, i.e. for theatres, one space for each three seats, plus one space per employee. Based on the proposed expansion that would add 559 seats, 186 new parking spaces would be required. The Zoning Ordinance provides that for certain complementary nighttime uses the required parking can be reduced by 50% if adequate parking to meet the total demand is available within 500 feet of the building. listed as an eligible nighttime use. reduced to 93 spaces. Because the theatre can provide no private parking on site, the proponents are requesting that an additional level be added to the 51st Street public ramp to satisfy the additional parking demand. ramp would provide 115 new parking spaces. anticipated by the 50th and France Plan which assigned additional development potential to specific properties within the district. additional assessments for parking and other public improvements based on the assigned expansion potential. expansions have occurred, however, two major planned additions have not occurred, the Arby's site and the undeveloped area immediately north of the 51st Street ramp and immediately west of the theatre. The theatre was not included in the properties with expansion potential. The proponents have submitted a parking and traffic analysis in support of their proposed expansion. The report concluded that the theatre use is complementary nighttime use which does not conflict with the daytime retail uses in the district. The report does find, however, that during peak daytime periods (12:OO noon - 3:OO p.m.) that the parking ramp is essentially full. The study finds the impact of the theatre on this condition to be minor. The additional 115 spaces will alleviate that parking deficiency and will increase retail activity according to the report. France were financed by a combination of tax increment bonds (80%) and special assessments (20%). Cineplex Odeon Corporation has proposed funding for the additional level of the ramp in the same manner, 20% to be assessed against the theatre owners and 80% to be picked up by tax increments generated in the District. Other property owners would incur no additional cost. Mr. Larsen directed the Council's attention to a memorandum prepared by Gordon Hughes regarding the proposed 51st Street parking ramp expansion. Planner Craig Larsen said that the subject property is The proposal under consideration The remainder would be floor area Mr. Larsen informed the Council that the Zoning Ordinance Theatres are specifically As a result, additional parking demand can be The proposed addition to the This expansion to the ramp was Those properties paid Mr. Larsen said that some of the anticipated Mr. Larsen explained that the original public improvements at 50th and The memorandum presented the history of the 50th 7/6/87 452 and France area, the 51st Street ramp expansion, the Tax Increment Finacing District and alternatives available for ramp financing if the Council approves the theatre expansion and the HRA approves the ramp expansion. Council/HRA decides that a portion of the ramp costs should be financed through special assessments, then a date should be set.for a project hearing, with any approval of the theatre expansion conditioned on the results of the hearing. if the HEU/Council wishes to use tax increments for any portion of the ramp costs, a public hearing should be conducted to amend the district's finance plan. hearings could be held at the same time but not sooner than August-3 in order to meet publication requirements. heard on two occasions by the Community Development and Planning Commission and the Heritage Preservation Board and that the proposal as now presented is the result of those hearings. merchants. Heritage Preservation Board recommended approval of the Final Development Plan for Cineplex Odeon Corporation, with the following conditions: 1) Deed restriction limiting the theatre portion of the property to theatre use only; the City Attorney has suggested that the use be limited as a condition of the parking variance and not as a deed restriction; 2) HRA authorization of the addition to the ramp, 3) Removal of paint by a method approved by staff, 4) Granting of a permit by the Council to occupy air rights above the City's sidewalk easement, and 5) Provision for trash storage within the building. representing Cineplex Odeon Corporation, then addressed the HRA/Council. In summary he commented that Cineplex Odeon Corporation desires to bring to Edina a first class motion picture facility which will serve as Edina's entertainment focal point. said the need for expansion is twofold. provide its patrons with first class facilities. of the existing theatre is jeopardized by the geometric constraints and quality of presentation. to provide a first class facility in order to secure first run movies. In order to insure satisfactory compliance with the community standards they have met with the 50th and France merchants, the Heritage Preservation Board and appeared twice before the Planning Commission. concerns of those groups by: a) maintaining the existing retail stores, b) historical restoration of the facade, keeping the marquee and retaining the existing character of the store fronts, c) reduction of the mass scale of the building by setting back the high portion of the building by 35 feet. Mr. Kofman said that in addition they intend to facilitate the relief of an already stressed parking situation by an addition to the 51st Street ramp and that the additional parking spaces will be available to the business community except for matinee performances. He stated that in order to accommodate the ramp expansion they are soliciting approval of the HRA's tax increment method of financing. cost and that it is not their intention to burden the other businesses with an increase in taxes for the parking component of the development. In conclusion, Mr. Kofman said that they believe the expansion of the Edina Theatre will reinforce the long term viability of this historic and important retail community. Commissioner/Member Turner asked if the Planning Commission discussed whether or not parking could be accommodated for additional development potential if the theatre expansion occurs. Mr. Larsen said that it was discussed by the Planning Commission and they felt in this case it could be accommodated because of the unique nature of the theatre use in relationship to the other retail uses. Commissioner/Member Turner asked, if at some point in the future the use as a theatre ended and the proposed re-use for the building with a FAR of 1.82 was retail, what would be the options for parking for that re-use. Mr. Larsen responded that at a FAR of 1.82 the most logical option would be to create some kind of use within the structure that would reduce the amount of active floor area and that would not space in other parts of the district for additional parking. the merchants have raised the question of putting a parking deck above the public different than the proposal before the Council and have not looked at the feasibility of a deck at that location. been received from residents in The Lanterns condoniums and asked if they would be affected by an assessment. Lanterns condominiums and some of the other residential properties around 50th and France are included in the Tax Increment District but were not included in the special assessment district originally and, presumably, would not be included. Commissioner/Member Smith commented that, even though the theatre's use is compatible to the retail uses in the 50th and France Area, he felt that there is a parking problem in the area and was concerned that just adding another level to the 51st Street ramp would not solve the problem. second level to the 49 1/2 Street public parking lot that the Council should know what. that cost would be before considering giving approval to the theatre's plan. Commissioner/Member Turner said that plan approval could be conditioned on approval and method of financing a rakp. theatre's plan is limited to adding a third floor to the 51st Street ramp and the financing for that addition. consideration of adding a second level to the 49 1/2 Street public parking and looking at that as the potential that the theatre would contribute to as opposed to It concluded that if the Also, Both Mr. Larsen informed the Council that the proposal was i ! I He added that the proponents have met with the 50th and France Based on the revisions made to the plans, the Planning Commission and Peter Kofman, professional engineer He First, the corporation has a mandate to Secondly, the long term viability He said that distributors are exerting extreme pressure on exhibitors By revision of the plans, they have addressed the major I I Cineplex would be prepared to fund 20% of the I I Continuing, I increase parking needs. Commissioner/Turner also asked if anyone has thought of of parking on 49 1/2 Street. Staff has taken the position that that is I Mr. Larsen said that I Commissioner/Member Kelly noted that several letters of objection had Gordon Hughes, HEU Executive Director, explained that The He said that if the solution was to build a Continuing, Commissioner/Member Smith said that the He said he felt the discussion should include the 7/6/87 453 adding a third floor on the ramp at 51st Street. Street ramp would be financed. option would be identical, whether you would add a third level to the south ramp or construct a parking deck at 49 1/2 Street. would have to publish for an improvement/assessment hearing. question to be determined is do we talk about improving the parking genrally in the area or specifically a ramp. He suggested that in order to keep the options open for the Council that the notice of hearing be as broad as possible as to the kind of improvement to be considered, and that it could be narrowed after the hearing if the Council so desired. parking deck to the 49 1/2 Street public parking had been discussed with the theatre and how it would be possible to improve the proposed project when only one option has been discussed with regard to the parking problem. Mr. Larsen replied that this was not discussed with the theatre; the proponents suggested the additional level to the south ramp because that is where there was structural capability to come up with the number of spaces to be provided. He said that there are some use questions on 49 1/2 Street that affect parking during the day, on some occasions more than others, that aren't necessarily related to the theatre or other general retail activity. He added that the key would be the number of spaces and it would be up to the Council to analyze the entire district to see where it iii, most appropriate to provide that parking. deck to 49 1/2 Street would be something they would consider. Mr. Kofman responded that, specifically, they are trying to provide the parking spaces to meet ordinance requirements and would consider whatever is deemed necessary. Mayor Courtney then asked for public comment. Thomas Kroth, The Lanterns condominiums, said that they would not like to see a high structure built across from them as it would detract from their property. practically never at night. assessment for the additional level on the 51st Street ramp. Mr. Hughes said that they would not be; that the 80% of the cost would come from the City's Housing and Redevelopment Authority which gets its funds from the new taxes that are generated from new develoment in the 50th and France District. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared. Mr. Larsen explained that there are certain thresholds for initiating an EIS and that the proposed project does not come close to the need for a study. Mr. Kroth said that 51st Street is a very small street and winds and is narrow and he was concerned that if the ramp's capacity is increased by 30% that it will add to the noise, air pollution and traffic congestion. He concluded by saying that he did not see the need for adding to the ramp. Lee Anderson, 5209 Valley View Road, commented that more people his age, 15, go to the theatre than adults, that they are dropped off by parents or bike to the theatre and that he did not think that associating the proposed addition to the ramp with the theatre made sense. the 50th and France Business ti Professional Association as a member and as a commercial property owner. He said the association was not speaking really in opposition as much as they wanted to be sure the Council realized some of the points they had addressed in the first meeting of the Community Development and Planning Commission. He presented three points that were made: 1) That they were not as favorably impressed with the economic success of the plan as were the theatre owners and that the success or failure of the project was not relevant to them unless it fails to the point where the property has to be re-used; then it becomes very relevant. 2) The association wanted to be sure that 50th and France keeps its. emphasis on retail and that they were concerned about the theatre's elimination of the three shops, which has now been resolved with the shops being retained in the plan. 3) France commercial area and they were very much in favor of the theatre's 20% participation in cost of constructing a third level on the 51st Street ramp. They also had stressed the necessity of additional parking on 49 1/2 Street. Mr. Brown alluded to the two areas where it is contemplated that eventually there is going to be additional redevelopment and that parking would need to be available at that time. He said that, whereas the association is delighted with the extra floor on the ramp at this time, they certainly hope that as such time as the additional construction commences that it would not be precluded because the theatre has ursurped the additional parking resulting from the added floor of the ramp. saying that they are hopeful that the Council's decision would include additional parking for 49 1/2 Street. money in the district to do the addition to the 51st Street ramp and to add parking on 49 1/2 Street. where it is starting to generate a very health increment; that it would not have any trouble financing the addition to the south ramp and could do more. Erickson commented with regard to the granting of a permit by the City to occupy air rights above the City's sidewalk easement. conditioned the same way the City would condition the parking varience, namely that the area allowed use be only for a theatre building and that the permit end if the building is removed or is,slestroyed. He also suggested that the permit include an indemnity clause that would indemnify the HRA and the City if there is any property damage or personal injury due to the overhang. these comments. He said he felt there is a fine line from having a wonderful commercial area such as we have at 50th and France to finding it becomes less Mayor Courtney asked how the 49 1/2 Mr. Hughes stated that in his view the financing Attorney Erickson pointed out that we He said that the Commissioner/Member Kelly asked if the possibility of adding a Commissioner/Member Kelly then aske'd the proponents if adding a parking I-- I: Lc) He said that very seldomly has he seen the ramp filled and He asked if The Lanterns would be charged a special a Mr. Kroth asked if an Hosmer Brown stated that he was speaking in behalf of I The association was concerned with the problem of parking in the 50th and He concluded by Commissioner/Member Kelly asked if there would be enough Mr. Larsen responded that the district is getting to the point Attorney He suggested that the permit be Commissioner/Member Richards made 7/6/87 454 attractive because the infrastructure breaks down. He said he was concerned that the we have not spend enough time really delving into the situation and that he had some Concerns. the proposed FAR is approved for this project. expansion proposed by the theatre would have on the 50th and France area. Third, the financing aspect; he said that he felt we need to examine our philosophy on public financing and how we participate to determine if this is a public improvement that is needed for the benefit of the public or if it is a benefit for just one segment of the private sector. Fourth, the environment affect of the proposed project on the entire area. be an asset to the 50th and France area and to the community. felt there is a parking problem for that commercial area which should be addressed. Commissioner/Member Turner said that her first reaction to the theatre expansion was positive; that it would be an asset to 50th and France .and -that the proponents have been responsive to the Heritage Preservation Board, the.€-lanning Commission and the business owners' concerns.. She said that she hoped the-parking questions can be resolved as well as some of the other concerns raised by.the Council. the HRA approved a plan for this area some time ago, she said it is a chance when we have a proposal of this size to step back and look at the overall plan for the district and make sure that this fits with what ?as envisioned for the corner. suggested that the Council look at the parking question at 49 .1/2 Street; that it discuss the FAR that is proposed and the precendent it might set; and that staff provide more information to make a decision on the kind of variance to requirements for commercial districts that has been requested. comments made by the Council, that it was notin a position to make a decision at this time. develop more information on the concerns and questions that have been raised. Commissioner/Member Smith then stated that he would like to king in the discussion of additional parking on 49 1/2 Street. Richards, he said that he agreed that the Council should.look at the proposed FAR; that he questioned getting into the economics of the -theatre.expansion; that he agreed on the third issue of the financing aspects of .the puhlic improvements and also the fourth issue of impact of the proposed project on the 50th and France commercial area. Following further discussion as to when a public hearing could be scheduled, the area to be notified and the notice itself, Commissioner/Member Smith moved the following: 1) That the public hearing on the Final Development Plan for Cineplex Odeon First, the precedent that would be set for other sectors of the City if Second, the affect that the major Commissioner/Member Kelly commented that she thought the theatre would She added that she .I Even though She Mayor Courtney said that from the He suggested that it be held over and that .in the meantime the staff As to the points made by Commissioner/Member Corporation (Edina Theatre) be continued to August 3, 1987, 2) &t a public hearing be scheduled for August 3, 1987 to consider parking improvements in the 50th and France Tax Increment District, and 3) That, .if needed, the Council conduct a public hearing on August 3, 1987 to consider an amendment to the 50th and France Commercial Area Plan. Motion was seconded by Comissioner/Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. CONSENT GIVEN ON REPRESENTATION OF EQUITABLE. CITY OF EDINA AND EDINA HRA REGARDING SOUTHDALE CENTER. dated June 22, 1987, that he had received from Dorsey & Whitney, Attorney for the City of Edina, with regard to their representation of Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States ("Equitable"), the owner of most of Southdale Center. The letter stated that Dorsey & Whitney has represented the City of Edina (llCityll) and the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority (WRA1') :for 'many years and now also represents Equitable. As previously discussed, because af-possible expansion of Southdale and because of the proposed development of the Hedberg and DeCourcy properties south of Southdale Center on France Avenue, .the.interests of Equitable, on the one hand, and the City and the HRA, on the other hand, are potentially adverse. The letter stated that also discussed was the continuing-representation of Equitable by Dorsey and Whitney in matters relating to Southdale.and other properties of Equitable which do not involve the City or the HRA, such.as leasing and operating agreements, and the continuing representation of Edina andthe HRA by Dorsey and Whitney in all matters, including those which may be adverse to Equitable. letter stated that Dorsey and Whitney will not representxquitable in any matters which involve the City or the HRA, irduding, without limitation, possible expansion of Southdale or development of the Hedberg and DeCourcy properties. that both he and Gordon Hughes, Executive Director of the.HRA, feel comfortable with the representation proposed by Dorsey and Whitney and asked for HRA/Council approval to sign the letter of consent. Commm'issioner/Member Kelly moved adoption of the following resolution: RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the Edina City Council that it hereby approves the representation by Dorsey and Whitney as set out in their letter of June 22, $987 with regard to Equitable, City of Edina and the Edina HRA; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that two officers, on behalf of the HRA, and the Mayor and Manager on behalf of the City, be authorized and directed to sign the aforesaid consent letter. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Commissioner/Member Turner. Manager Rosland directed the Council's attention to a letter, The Ii Mr. Rosland said 7/6/87 455 Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. Commissioner/Member Smith suggested that the basic policy of Dorsey and Whitney in any matter be that it will not represent parties where interests conflict with those of the HRA or the City unless the HRA and the City consent otherwise. Erickson stated that this was the basic policy of Dorsey and Whitney, that any matters that may involve a potential conflict of interest would be brought to the attention of the Council and the HRA commissioners. Attorney rc m m a COMMISSIONER/MEMBER KELLY PRESENTS STATEMENT REGARDING PARTICIPATION IN HEDBERG PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT. present a statement to the HRA/Council regarding participation in discussions and voting on the Hedberg property development. appropriate to present the seatement at the time of any public hearing regarding the Hedberg property development. Attorney Erickson concurred that the statement should be made at the time of such hearings. following statement: Commissioner/Member Kelly stated that she would like to Manager Rosland said that it may be more Commissioner/Member Kelly then read the STATEMENT OF PEGGY KELLY REGARDING PARTICIPATION IN DISCUSSIONS AND VOTING ON THE HEDBERG PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT I wish to make a statement concerning my possible conflict of interest regarding the development of the Hedberg property. My husband, Michael Kelly, is president of The Center Companies. The Center Companies manages, but does not own, Southdale Shopping Center. the Equitable Real Estate Group, on behalf of the owners of Southdale, may raise objections to the proposed development of the Hedberg property because of its traffic impact, densities, subsidies and failure to follow the comprehensive plan. through my husband’s company, I believe that I can fairly, impartially and objectively fulfill my duties as a member of the Edina City Council, and as a Commissioner of the Edina HRA, in the discussions of, and the voting on, all aspects of the Hedberg development. development proceedings in order to fulfill my responsibilities as an elected official. present law to disqualify myself from such discussions or votes. votes on the Hedberg development. and the public to know in advance of this possible conflict. No comment was made or action taken by the HRA/Council. It is possible that Even if such objections are raised, and despite the connection with Southdale I also believe that I must participate in the Hedberg I have been advised by the City Attorney that I am under no clear duty under Therefore, I do not intend to disqualify myself from the discussions on and But I do want the Council, the proposed developers There being no further business to be conducted by the HRA, moti Kelly was seconded by Cobmissioner Smith for adjou ommissioner Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtne Motion carried, HRA adjourned.