Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-10-05 HRA Regular Meeting Y • MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL OCTOBER 5, 1999 - 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Commissioners Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly and Chair Maetzold. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Kelly and seconded by Commissioner Johnson approving the Consent Agenda as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold Motion carried. *MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR SEPTEMBER 21, 1999, AND THE SEPTEMBER 28 1999, SPECIAL MEETING APPROVED Motion made by Commissioner Kelly and seconded by Commissioner Johnson approving the Minutes of the September 21, 1999, Regular Meeting and the September 28, 1999, • Special Meeting. Motion carried on rollcall vote - five ayes. KUNZ/LEWIS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT DISCUSSED Chair Maetzold explained at the HRA meeting on September 21, 1999, directed staff to meet with the final four proposers for the Kunz/Lewis site. The four proposers were encouraged to supply financial statements and traffic impacts, as well as elaborate on their proposals. At the hearing October 19, 1999, neighbors will be allowed to give testimony about the project. Chair Maetzold suggested HRA questions should frame the issues of the project with points of clarification. Commissioner Faust suggested having a time schedule and decision date in mind to keep everyone on schedule. Director Hughes explained if developers were selected on October 19, two months would be available to negotiate details and draft a letter of intent for Council consideration. The consideration should not go much beyond December 19, 1999. He reminded the HRA that Edinborough took five years to complete a redevelopment agreement. Commissioner Faust asked how much lead time the City needs to submit information to the State. Director Hughes noted that nothing needs to be submitted to the State. The g 9 December 31, 1999, deadline is a matter of law and adequate records need to be maintained showing that action was taken on the matter, according to the date specified 1 in the Statute. Chair Maetzold added the letter of intent must be in place by December • 31, 1999. Commissioner Johnson said he personally would rather make a decision at the November 1, 1999, meeting after absorbing the presentations at the October 19, 1999, meeting. Commissioner Kelly concurred. Chair Maetzold voiced concern that reaching a consensus at a regular meeting may not be reasonable and therefore setting a special meeting date would be prudent. Commissioner Hovland asked how the financial analysis is going with individual developers. Director Hughes said meetings have been scheduled with the four finalists within the next week. Commissioner Kelly asked that due diligence be done via a two step analysis; 1) executive summary for financial strength, and 2) tax increment generated by the proposal. Chair Maetzold noted that the developers may be reluctant to make their balance sheet public as in essence they are private organizations. He suggested one method would be to have the financials submitted to the City Attorney for an analysis and provide the Council with a summary of the strength of the proponents. Commissioner Hovland stated he favored a special meeting being called. • HRA consensus was to set the special meeting at 6:30 P.M., October 26, 1999, the location to be announced. Commissioner Faust asked if neighborhood comments should be taken into account now or after January 1. Director Hughes said testimony need not be taken into account regarding the site plan before January 1, 2000. Commissioner Hovland submitted written questions stating seven points he developed that could be used for consideration in selecting a developer; 1) risk benefit analysis, 2) financial matters, 3) concept, 4) land use, 5) mass, 6) aesthetics, and 7) timing. Commissioner Faust inquired whether, when the financial analysis is being done, the financials could be compared or would it be easier to set the scope previous to the analysis. Manager Hughes stated all the proposals seem to have the same basic concept after meeting with Ehlers and Associates representative. The proposals all reflect different levels of public assistance as well as financing concepts with respect to that assistance. Staff should be able to show how they compare and contrast with one another. Commissioner Kelly summarized; October 19 hold a public hearing; October 26, 101 workshop; and November 1, decision made on developer. 2 • Correspondence was received from Gene Haugland, Haugland Company Real Estate Development, withdrawing their proposal from the finalists. The Marriott Life Care Community proposal would not be feasible because of timing and the necessity of pre- commitments from buyers. No HRA action was taken. RESOLUTION ADOPTED ORDERING WEST 49 1/2 STREET PARKING RAMP IMPROVEMENT NO. P-4a AND GRANTING VARIANCE FROM SETBACK Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Engineering presentation Mr. Hoffman explained the Council and the HRA conducted a joint hearing on September 7, 1999, to consider constructing additional parking spaces on the north ramp at 50'h & France. Since September 7, 1999, staff and consultants have reviewed the project. Staff, after reviewing the alternatives, recommended an alternative the uses only the Lee property and existing ramp property. The primary reasons for not using the Hooten Cleaners site were; 1) private property, 2) relocation of a business, and 3) impact upon more residential properties. The USBank site was rejected for similar reasons. • I! Mr. Hoffman added the "Clancy" surface lot was examined as well because it is a more centralized location. However Clancy's lot provide a low net gain of spaces, limited truck access, limited site, eliminate storefront visibility and disrupt centralized existing parking during construction. He noted that staff has over the past been made aware of the desire to have some non-structured open parking by businesses for customer who do not wish to park in a ramp. Mr. Hoffman reported he met with the neighbors on September 27, 1999, to discuss options ranging from "no build": to "full-build" options. The results of the meeting were: • Additional ramp expansion not justified at this time. Three traffic counts indicate many open spaces • Adjacent property owners prefer no further encroachments on their property, i.e., visually or on their site • Do not favor City purchasing properties and reselling to new owners • Business activity is encroaching upon residential neighbors • Ramp expansion has negative effect on property values • Staff has received a packet from the neighborhood which opposes the ramp expansion He stated potential options that might provide mitigation for the project include: • Home improvements to the four adjacent residential properties similar to some of the Metropolitan Airports Commission relating to the Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport 3 • Residential landscape easements and landscaping • • Ramp modifications setting back some sections of the north ramp wall allowing for landscaping or design elements enhancing the north side view • Providing sound mitigation activities on the interior ramp walls Mr. Hoffman concluded that a ramp expansion would increase parking spaces by approximately 90 spaces to 110 spaces if the project were approved. Final design and mitigation concepts would be developed after the project is approved. Staff would expect the 50th & France Business area to finance any additional expenses occurring north of the north ramp. Council comments Commissioner/Member Kelly asked where funds would come from for landscaping and purchase of the easement. Mr. Hoffman said the funds would come from the special assessments. Commissioner/Member Faust said after cutting out the corner, how would the corner be restored. Mr. Hoffman described the landscape plan in detail. Member Faust asked further about the cedar fence. Mr. Hoffman explained the fencing would be for privacy concerns. Chair/Mayor Maetzold asked whether the heavy landscaping would be in lieu of the improvements similar to the Metropolitan Airport improvements. Mr. Hoffman said the • most feasible approach would be to soundproof the homes. He does not know whether this would be approved by the neighborhood. Commissioner/Member Johnson asked if the ramp is approved would there be a broad enough resolution to achieve the desired outcome. Mr. Hoffman said if the neighbors were to file a claim against the City we would have to settle it. Director Hughes reminded the Council that what is being sought is authorization of the project with the notch removed and including direction to staff to pursue mitigation, and the landscaping plan. If neighbors did not want the landscaping, the City would not want to condemn the property to landscape. Commissioner/Member Hovland inquired whether a mechanism exists to fund lawsuits if they were to occur. Mr. Hughes said the total project is partially funded with tax increments as well as assessments. Ultimately the project would be back before the Council during an assessment hearing and the cost split decided upon at that time. He cautioned that the north property line of the ramp is the boundary of the tax increment district. Therefore, it would be difficult to spend tax increment funds to the north. Staff would recommend that the cost split be shifted more to the assessment. Commissioner/Member Hovland asked what the cost per stall in the ramp is at today. Mr. Hoffman said there would be no change to the cost estimate as previously proposed. It 4 i • Commissioner/Member Faust asked if the tax increment funds were coming from all of Edina. Mr. Hughes explained that tax increments come from taxes generated from the TIF District. These funds are not available for use by the City, School District and the County. Therefore they may only be used by the City to fund public improvements in this district. It could be argued that since those dollars are captured in this district, it forces the remainder of the community to pay higher taxes than would otherwise be paid. The converse of the argument is without the tax increment district, the development may not have occurred in the first place and therefore, the extra taxes would be a moot point. Resident comments Bill Sleds, representing the commercial corner at 501h & France, voiced his opinion that a ramp addition is necessary. John Smaby, Manager of Edina Realty Office adjacent to the parking ramp, stated while they are sympathetic to homeowners, being in the realty business, this ramp is necessary for the growth of the 50th & France area. If the ramp is not built, parking will begin spilling into the neighborhood. He concluded that every day the ramp is full. Gail Dean, 3925 West 491h Street, commented she was appalled when she surveyed the ramp and found 68 spaces open in the middle ramp; and 34 in the north ramp. What she finds is rude people who find it an inconvenience to not park directly next to • where they are going. She suggested reducing the number of 90 minute signs to open up longer parking times. Ms. Dean said the pictures are deceiving and she is totally against the ramp addition. She believes a survey should be done of the neighbors and further believes the easement will not be sufficient. Kathleen Godfrey, 3938 West 491h Street, and a member of the 501h & France Business Association, said she had submitted a letter dated September 30, 1999, minutes from a meeting held September 24, 1999, and a petition with numerous signatures affixed. She stated the need for additional parking has not been substantiated. The ramp expansion and variance is not an option for the neighborhood. Lee Wiseman, 4229 Chowen, owner of Fashion Avenue at 4936 France Avenue, stated the area does need the parking. Shawna Engelsma, owners of Spalon Montage, said the area has a parking problem. She added they receive complaints often about no parking spots. She voiced concern that people will go elsewhere if they can't find a place to park their car. Pat Tucker, 4705 Upper Terrace, representing the Edina Chamber of Commerce at 7701 Normandale Road, read the position statement submitted by the Chamber dated September 27, 1999, unanimously supporting the proposal to increase vehicle capacity of the north ramp at 501h and France from their August 26, 1999, board meeting. 5 Marty Rud, 6222 France Avenue South, elaborated that between 1991 and 1996 the . City began surveying the ramp for potential expansion. Businessowners at 50th & France request this expansion and encourage the Council's approval. Roberta Castellano, 4854 France Avenue South, read her submitted letter that her neighbors should be given credit for their concerns and are not an opposition-without- cause group. Her letter asked numerous questions about the ramp expansion project. Richard Cochrane, 3922 West 49th Street, stated that anything higher than two stories would dominate the neighborhood, much like Uptown, and he does not believe that is what 50th & France wants to be. He suggested building a ramp over Clancy's lot or the USBank location. Barbara Zwack, of Chico's on the corner of 501h & France, acknowledged that change is difficult but it is very important to keep parking within the commercial district. Jan Monson, 3945 West 491h Street, inquired of Mr. Rud when, in his estimation, peak times happen. Mr. Rud responded 11:00 A.M,. to 2:00 P.M. She said the most desirable parking lot is the Talbot's lot and people want to park there leaving other spots empty. She voiced concern with the proposed plantings and the work it will take to keep them acceptable. Ms. Monson concluded that her hope is the Council decision to build the ramp is not based on pressure to spend the tax increment funds on 105 115 new parking spaces. • Karen Knudsen, Executive Director of the 501h & France Association, voiced assurance to the Council that the Association spends a great deal of time attempting to manage parking as efficiently as possible and remain good neighbors to the neighborhood. In 1999, over 800 parking permits were sold. They are told repeatedly that the #1 concern in the area is parking in trying to maintain the vitality of the business district. She said the Association would very much appreciate more parking availability. Correspondence was received from Mitchell J. Avery, President of dana's, stating it appears the site as proposed is the most ideal site for an expansion or addition to parking in the area; and from Thomas M. Nelson, President, Eberhardt Properties, Inc., supporting the ramp addition as an intelligent continuation of a model infrastructrue that will benefit the 501h and France area owners and neighbors for many years to come. Commissioner/Member Kelly made a motion to close the public hearing, Commissioner/Member Johnson seconded the motion. Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold Motion carried. Council Comment Chair Maetzold said staff has recommended to proceed with the ramp and give staff the authority to work with the neighbors regarding landscaping, home improvements and related matters. 6 Commissioner/Member Kelly stated he believes the proposal is good under the circumstances. He voiced concern with the difference of opinion of whether we need the parking ramp now. Mr. Hoffman said each day is different. Mr. Kelly said this is a difficult situation and staff has handled it well in attempting to mitigate the concern. He said further he has never seen such a generous mitigation plan. This is a very important area for Edina. The Council has turned down expansive plans in the 50th & France area in the past, in an attempt to keep growth at a reasonable level and this ramp expansion proposal is important to protect the vitality of the area. Mr. Kelly concluded starting on this project sooner rather than later is appropriate. He reminded the neighbors they bought their homes near a commercial district with its risks and rewards and encouraged the neighbors to work with the plan. Commissioner/Member Faust said she too had surveyed the area and found various states of fullness in the ramp. She said while she sympathizes with the neighbors she supports the proposal going forward. Commissioner/Member Hovland said this is one of those judgement calls the Council is elected to make. He indicated it is not easy to live next to a commercial area with no buffer but despite that, he believes 49" Street to be a nice street. He looks at the area as a balancing act between private property and the business community. The Council must balance the interests of both. Mr. Hovland said he believes staff has done a great • job with this solution. He would vote to expand the ramp. Commissioner/Member Johnson said in his short tenure on the Council, he has been asked what he has learned. He responded that residents speaking before the Council are articulate and with passionate convictions. After much thought, he said he would support the ramp expansion. Chair Maetzold concurs with the Council. He stated there are key stakeholders, i.e. residents and business community. The Council needs to control the growth in the area and maintain it as a vibrant shopping area. He voiced his support for the ramp expansion. Commissioner/Member Faust asked when construction would begin. Mr. Hoffman said construction should begin in the spring and be completed by fall of the year 2000. Commissioner/Member Kelly made a motion closing the hearing for ramp expansion P-4a, the north ramp at 50th & France. Commissioner/Member Johnson seconded the motion Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold Motion carried. CLAIMS PAID Commissioner Hovland made a motion approving payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated September 29, 7 1999, and consisting of one page totaling, $130,015.95. Commissioner Faust seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Faust, Hovland, Johnson, Kelly, Maetzold Motion carried. There being no further business on the HRA Agenda, Chair Maetzold declared the meeting adjourned at 7:25 P.M. Executive Director 8