1991 05 23CHANHASSEN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 23, 1991
Chairman Horn called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m..
MEMBERS PRESENT: Clark Horn, Don Chmiei, Jim Bohn, and Chariie Robbins
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Wot kman
STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Executive Director and Todd Gerhardt, Asst.
Executive Director
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chmiel moved, Bohn seconded to approve the Minutes of
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting dated April 18, 1991 as
presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
UPDATE ON MARKET SQUARE.
Horn: We'll go onto the update on Market Square. Tell us that by the end
of June we're going to be all set.
Brad Johnson: Did you guys get the report that we sent out?
Ashworth: They have it in front of them.
Brad Johnson: They haven't read it?
Ashworth: No. They did not. Brad had stopped over...and I had stated
that I would try to take and get something out before the meeting and just
really was not able to so. What you have in front of you, there's a number
of items there. Number one was we did, we went back to Deloitte and one of
the concerns I've had as this has progressed has been, is the level of
subsidy still the same as it's been? In other words, we've had a number of
different players involved with this, primarily Super Value and now
Gateway. Gateway brings to the market or brings to the table a different
package and the question becomes one of what are their current forecasts?
What type of dollars are they using as far as weekly sales? Does this
really make sense or not? The-ones we used were Deloitte representing the
City Auditors, they have a number of grocery accounts on a national basis
and the issue presented, and I think you have two reports there from
Deloitte and both of those really looked at subsidy level that was being
requested. What I told Deloitte was the total is deceiving in that the
incentive over to Bernie Hanson and to Kent are included as a part of the
development subsidy when Deloitte looked at the proposal. That's not
really a fair way to do it in that in moving Bernie we had to look to a
total cash out position. Not only the cost of acquiring his property but
also moving him over to this new site. What the analysis comes down in
saying is that, and I must say Gateway was a little relunctant to opening
their books for Deloitte but they did do it. In fact, they have asked the
information that the information that you have in front of you be kept
confidential simply because it does disclose what they perceive to be
weekly sales and what they perceive as market conditions-and how the,
literally losses that they are anticipating taking during the early period.
The short and the long of it is Deloitte is saying to us that the subsidy
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 2
levels that have previously been negotiated have basically stayed the same
through most of the process and if anything have been converted into lower
cash amounts. Number one are reasonable. Two, that Gateway is not walking
away with fantastic dollars. Three, that the developer's request is
reasonable. And four, that in the marketplace you could actually support a
higher subsidy level than that proposed. The second area that we use
Deloitte for, and this was one in which they had actually come back to the
City, was in terms of our overall investment program. Both from the City
as well as an HRA standpoint. At this point in time both the City and the
HRA have a very reasonable sized portfolio and one of the questions become
how do we get the best return on our dollars. As you're probably aware,
cities, HRA's can invest dollars in General Motors. American Telephone.
Any type of Fortune 500 company. We generally have not done that but one
of the aspects that I had them take a look at was, look at the Super Value
or the supermarket complex in light of that potentially becoming an
investment for the HRA. Where we have a subsidy level to them but in
addition we would literally be investing in that project attempting to
yeild a return back to ourself that might be greater than we might receive
for other type of dollars. In that process we did go back to through the
developer so the one report that's showing the return that's proposed for
the if we invested in the project $600,000.00. You'll see an annual return
there that exceeds lO~ per year. In fact one of the return areas where I
think it hits 25~. I had those numbers reviewed also by Deloitte and one
of the questions I posed back to them was the City, HRA, we're in a point
in time where there is a major crunch for property tax dollars. No one
wants to see increases in property taxes. One of the means that we can use
in investment technique like this is insure that there's a future stream of
dollars that are coming back to the City and HRA that are not reliant on
property taxes or provide us a means by which to look to other forms of
revenue other than just traditional property taxes. Well, the end of my
report or the conclusion is really one that if the HRA were to look at the
shopping center complex as a vehicle under which we would be making an
investment, holding a portion of the mortgage, I think that the developer
is ready to stand up this evening and tell you that the total financing
would then be in place. Brad would you like to go through a little?
Brad 3ohnson: Yeah, let me just also, I think I sent out something the
other day. You guys aren't in the real estate business every day like we
are but it is interesting to see what happens. Even now our center's
anchored with what you call all Gateways. You know, no Bernie's. No
Merlin's. No anybody. They are now starting to require, I've got another
article here that's out of this week magazine that requires 65~ loan to
value. That's a change from about lO~ loan to value when we first, started
trying to do downtown Chanhassen. So what is happening slowly is that the
amount of equity that the lenders are starting to require in a deal to get
the deal done is getting quite large. So all developers, whether it's us.
There's just an article here. We've all heard of Simon. They're building
this large complex over here. They're in partnership with the City of
Cleveland in a deal that they're doing because they could not put the
equity together. The Mayor actually went out and raised the equity locally
for the project which they've been working on for 3 years, which sounds
familiar to this. Where we are is as of today we can get a mortgage
commitment on the property probably from Lutheran Brotherhood. I say
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 3
probably because we have to go some other hurdles which would be a take out
Ioan for $3.6 miIlion which the vaiue of the project is .in the neighborhood
of $5.8 million. We've been looking for a mortgage of $4.2 million which
is reasonabIe. That wouid be 75~ ioan to vaiue and I think Chariie, you
would say that was, in the old days, that was normal. I have to refer to
you as the banker. But they have now come out in their underwriting and
said they want 65~ loan to value. There are probably other ways ~or us to
finance this but the problem is, as we get into those kinds of areas it
becomes very risky for those that are in it because for example if we were
able to get a $4.2 million construction loan. If the market continues to
go the direction it's going, a year or two from now when we have to take
that out, the maximum loan we could get on the property would be $3.6
million and that just causes it, I think if you talk to Clayton and other
people who are investing, a lot of concern. The person that is putting
together this package for us with Lutheran Brotherhood has put a number of
transactions like this together and generally speaking what happens is the
difference between say 65~ loan to value and 75~ loan to value, which to
say is that's what we're looking for, has been raised through what is
called a soft second mortgage through pension funds. In other words, a
pension fund will come in and invest their money. The reason they will do
that simply is the return at this point is high and they're still in a
secure position. I mean they're still less than 75~ loan to value. So
what you have in front of you, I think they received it, is a run we did on
their computer using the software and something called a second mortgage
but it's sort of like what Don said. We're short $600,000.00. We're out
looking around for that $600,000.00 but it's tough to find equity. We
could probably be under construction with this project, plus or minus 30
days, August 1. With a take out we have a construction loan so that part
would be put together. We have to have two loans.. Remember we explained
that. First of all we've got to get a construction loan and the take out
and the banks don't want to do the take out. Another benefit of that is we
don't have to change the partnership much. In other words we don't have to
go out and bring in a whole new group of people to try to get just the
construction loan and that would delay us another probably 2 to 3 months
just the process or renegotiating the, and I've explained in all my letters
to you that they...a lot of different kind of peopIe to see how the
transaction could go together. I wouid say within our own community we
have Iooked just about everywhere for a Ioan. And as I said, the Lutheran
Brotherhood one is the onIy one that wouId be a iegitimate take out. It
couid be either a 5 year term at today's market. The rates went up a
Iittie the iast day right CharIie? 9 7/8~? And if we had a 10 year ioan,
it'd be 10 1/4~ or 10 1/$~. They'd be varying untll we cIosed. So what
you have in front o~ you is, the ~ay a sIo~ second ~orks is, and that's
what we're iooking for, ls that the bank gets thelr first and somebody's
second and they get negotiated return on thelr money of 10~. In addition
to that, they get an addltionai 25~ of aII the cashfiow from the project
pIus 25~ of the increase i n vaIue. Rnd they anticipate that 25~ would be
~orth about a hail a m[iiion doiIars in about 5 years because remember the
project's reaIiy worth much more than ~hat ~e've been taiking about.
That's not unusuaI for iike the City of Minneapoiis has done those types of
transactions. TH 4 and TH 5 housing project lsa project iil-ke that and as
I think I've said to Don, I think the c[ty from just a straight subsldy
point of view has done a very reasonabie job as far as ~e're concerned and
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 4
for us to come back and say geez we can't get the deal done. We just need
more money. We prefer to come back and say look, we've got an opportunity.
This is, we have pension plan. GMAC, the guys that are doing this, they're
going to tell you which pension plans are doing this and why. And the
reason is, they get a fairly high rate of return on their cash. They can
either require it to be out of the deal or not be out of the deal at the
fifth year and most of these they do want to be out the fifth year. And
they get the residual. We are at the present time, if we get the next
tenant that's in line, we'll be at 90~ pre-leased when we go into the
ground which is outstanding for a project of this type. Ail our other
projects in town, the best we've ever been is 50~ pre-leased. You can
measure yourself what the risk of that would be but that's what we've
presented to Don. I don't think we came over with the idea that the City
would assist us. We thought we'd explain to you where we were on our
commitment and the next problem would be raising the equity. I don't know
how you all feel about the market or if you feel comfortable when I say
it's going to be 65X, if I'm right or not as far as what the equity is
that's required but that's what we're being told by the insurance
companies. I can keep sending things you know. There's an article by the
mortgage bankers association that's saying that. A good friend of mine
runs Lutheran Brotherhood and he said that most of their apartment deals
today are 50~ loan to value and they're getting as many of those as they
want. They're all refinances. Nobody's building them. That's really
what's happening is that if somebody wants to lend money into real estate,
they can do it on an unleveraged basis. So they don't have to be chasing.
We can answer questions and I don't think we're asking for a solution or
motion or anything but that's where we are. We could probably start plus
or minus a few days around August 1st. That meets Gateway's requirements.
That meets Bernie's requirements. That meets Merlin's requirements and
MGM's lease is up at January 1 so all of those people that are our primary
tenants for this particular project who have either relocation problems or
moving problems or timing problems would be comfortable with that
particular date. Do you have anything else to add?
Gerhardt: This is one, you have one computer run that shows the...25%
return. Here's the one that shows the 10% with...
Brad 3ohnson: This is just a software program so they start initially with
the cash flow from the project. I'm not sure which is page 1 for you guys.
Are they looking at the same thing I've got here?
Ashworth: Should be. You're reviewing the 25~ right?
Brad Johnson: One is just the 10~ return to the lender. That's the return
to the lender. If you look at the one they should be looking at.
Ashworth: Which is the earlier one you had. Disregard the one that Todd
just gave you.
Brad 3ohnson: If you just go to the left hand side it says loan amount
$600,000.00. Do you have that one in front of you?
Horn: Right.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 5
Brad 3ohnson: And then it goes Year 1, Year 2, Year 3. Second mortgage
note would be $600,000.00 and say the rate was 10~. The next line down
from that shows the 10~ return on the $600,000.00 which is $60,000.00. And
then if you go back to the detail just prior to this, you'll see on the
first year of operation it'd probably be more like 92...open today but it'd
be $47,000.00 was the estimated cash flow. As part of the transaction, not
only do you get 10~ but you get an additional one quarter or 25~ of the
other cash flow so cash flow that you would receive in addition to the
$47,440.00 is $11,860.00 so that would, if you take your 10~ above and add
to that 1.98~, that would make it 12~. The next year the project is
actually full approximately so we have 4.3. You have cash flow on the
project at that time of approximately $103,000.00 and therefore your share
would be $25,000.00 and that would raise your return to approximately
14.31~ or $85,000.00 on $600,000.00. And it goes on like that. If we went
into the sixth year, which they did not do here, there's a big increase in
rents at that time. So you could make a decision at the fifth year to
sell. Now this is a little bit of hypothetical. They have assumed that
the rents go up along with what our leases are and our expenses go up 4~ a
year. In other words, we've already got the leases are already TUn out.
Many of our leases go 20 years but if we were to sell at that point with
the pay down and there's back-up to that, the residual value of the 25~ in
the project would be $568,000.00. So at that time the City could say okay,
we want you guys to take us out of the deal and the deal could be written
that way. Or you could have an option to do that at that time. Or you
could say well run this thing for 10 years, maybe it's a good deal. We'll
get a 10 year loan. This loan is predicated on a 5 year loan but we can
get a 10 year term. That's sort of how it would work. I guess if I were
in your shoes I'd have to ask a lot of questions to see if you were
comfortable with it but basically you're lending the difference between 65~
and 75~. We're not up at 100~ loan to value or 90~ loan to value and
you're protected before all the other investors. The partners will have at
least $700,000.00 in before you so you'd be ahead of the partnership
itself. As I said, I think you have to get kind of comfortable. We have
to get you all the information about what the market's doing and that this
is a reasonable deal. I've got quotes here from the various people at the
insurance companies and this is the kind of deals they're looking for.
Somewhere like that and people are doing all kinds of stuff to try to put
the deal together. Because they know that construction has just come to a
halt. I mean I don't know how much new construction of any size you've got
going on in town on the commercial side but unless it's a AAA tenant that
is going to be the tenant, nobody can get anything done right now. We've
got a very good project for the community. I think you all agree on that.
It will make the downtown community and we've got the lease that I think
everybody wants so with that I, do you have anything to add Clayton?
Clayton Johnson: Not really.
Brad Johnson: Like I said, I can keep shooting you stuff on the industry
to say this is really what's going on. It's not easy.
Horn: What's the next step for us Don?
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, i991 - Page 6
Ashworth: What I was hoping, trying to get us to was a point where we've
got a project. If the HRA would like to see staff pursue this further. In
other words, you've gotten the first run of the numbers show what I
consider to be a good return. You had Deloitte investigate the project.
They feel that it would be a reasonable investment. Reasonable investment
for the HRA. You should instruct staff to further pursue this alternative
with the idea that we can be back here within, I look back to either Brad
or Clayton, hopefully a 2 week period of time saying we've got a project.
We're ready to go. I think that we're all frustrated coming into meetings
like this and not hearing that the project is done. Finalized. Ready to
go. I think that we're bringing to the table a lending technique that will
make sure that the project does in fact happen and that we don't just
continue to meet each month and hear some new reason for why the thing
isn't going somewhere. Talking with the attorneys, financial consultants,
auditors, it sound as though from City HRA perspective that it's a
reasonable way to go and I think from the developer's side, if they knew
that we were willing to pursue this alternative, I think that they would be
ready to stand up and say, we think we can bring back a definitive
statement saying we're ready to go and then...
Brad Johnson: We've got to check with Lutheran Brotherhood to see how fast
they will give us the firm commitment as part of the application...
Clayton Johnson: It would be a two stage transaction. I think that if
that's something we're going to pursue, we'd have to get all the parties
together and negotiate the deal and then we're have to formally apply for
the Lutheran Brotherhood commitment, which in time we apply is about 15
days for approval and about an additional 30 to close. So I mean I think
we can't apply formally until the structure of the partnership is defined
and I think that's what Don would take a couple weeks. If there was an
interest in doing that, I think Amcon, yourselves, ourselves would have to
get together and work an arrangement that's acceptable to all of us. And
make sure that Burdick is also on board. So I see it as a two phased
program.
Bohn: What's Burdick's role in this?
Clayton Johnson: Well Burdick owns the land and we had purchased the land
from him on a Contract for Deed but I'm not so sure when everything is said
and done that the form of that transaction we shouldn't change it. He has
a strong interest also in getting this project done.
Robbins: Would he be one of the partners then?
Clayton Johnson: Well I don't know. We'll see but I mean the point is
that he should have a strong interest just like all of us do and it would
take some cooperation from him. I think he'd be willing to give it.
I don't think we should just look at it though rigidly like the deal has
been structured. I think you really start with a clean piece of paper and
say what's in the best interest of everybody and how do we get it done. I
think that's a two week process. And that we really, even though we have
had every encouragement that we'd get the Lutheran Brotherhood commitment,
I believe that we do not formally apply until we have that agreement.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 7
Ashworth: I think we need to try to do something to get this back on track
and I agree with Brad. Right now they're not lending dollars out there.
Chmiel: At the time time Brad you mentioned that you had some people out
in the wings that potentially were looking at making an investment possibly
into this. Nhere is that at with those people right now? Other than
Lutheran Brotherhood.
Brad 3ohnson: Where we are is we've got one group that is, which would be
basically a buy-out of everybody that's in our project. Trying to figure
out if they can do it. The problem you've got there is whatever that was,
it would be a 2 to 3 month process to negotiate the deal, or at least 2
months. Even if they had the, because they would come in and say the
project. I just know what's going to happen. It's not worth it and then
beat up on all the partners. Or come back to the City for more assistance.
Or whatever to make it work for them. What they wanted to do first was to
have the loan in place. They don't and work on it for a month. It's
possible that they could. But that particular process I perceive as, this
one we could start marching. That one I think we'd back talking to you 2
more times, just having gone through those kinds of buyouts. We did that
on the apartment building and how long did that take us to make a complete
change?
Clayton Johnson: Don, if I could attempt to answer the question. I think
one of the things that's very attractive about the Lutheran Brotherhood is
that we can throw stones in it because it's only $3.6 million. However,
one of the things that's very attractive about it is the non-recourse loan
meaning that the recourse is only due to real estate so we are in a
position, a much better position to attract investors today into a deal in
which they risk their capital but that's all they risk. So I think the
Lutheran Brotherhood commitment, even though it may not be as much in terms
of loan to value as we may like, has a very attractive feature. It's one
that...but it is a timing issue. There's no question.
Brad 3ohnson: Yeah, right now we do not have an investor with $600,000.00
to the best of my knowledge who's willing to fund the project. That's why
if this would work, I guess the City could say okay we'll come in. We want
out. I think Don's approached it differently. I thought they were more of
an investment for you and is it a better return than you could get
someplace else? It probably is given where market funds are. They're down
to 6, 7 and 8 and you probably, you know this whole project with the bank
being built over there and everything is going to generate almost
$400,000.00 in taxes ultimately and I think we're only taking the first 3
years of it or so so. It just, as an investment from the City's point of
view I think it makes a lot of sense. And from the community, I'm a little
tired of my neighbors saying when are we going to get the grocery store.
They ask you and they ask me and I think so. Sateway is pressing me to
sign the lease and they're pressing me that they want to be in the ground
August let so I can show you a letter. I've got the letter with you on
that one too. So I mean you've got these little pressures of things. I
can always tell him I can't do it either... But in answer to your
question, we have taken the same run you see before you, or we're at two
pension plans looking at them. They have not responded. Some are just out
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 8
of money. One of them has invested too much money already recently. They
want to do partner deals rather than, right now apartments are hot because
they know that people can't move out. When you move out you don't have to
rebuild them... It has nothing to do with Chanhassen I know but the big
investors just don't want to come to town until the Mega Mall's full.
Retail from, I think I saw in another report over here, retail from a list
of projects that anybody wants to finance at all is down about, again it
has nothing to do with, these articles they'll say there are pockets of
deals that are reasonable deals. We have one of those. I mean nobody that
I've talked to disagrees. Except for this one thing...one case they've
been trying to do this project in Cleveland for years and they finally got
the City and everybody together to do it. This is Mel Simon. Big company.
Another group was talking about the fact that Wall Street won't be back iht
he business of raising equity for these deals for a couple more years.
It's just this is the way it is. Right in there it says 25~ to 30~ equity.
Well when you can't raise equity, it's tough. As I said, within the
partnership and without, with all the people we've contacted which Don I
say I've, you know that little book I printed that's gone out to 30 people.
Right now it's in Las Vegas with a bunch of developers. But if this was a
reasonable solution, I think we could start here and get there. The other
ones will always bring, when you bring in new partners to the deal, it
isn't as simple as it looks. They're going to say well, all that
architecture work that Amcon did isn't worth anything. So Amcon will get
ticked or they'll say to Herb and these guys your land is only worth blah.
Let's get rid of Herb. And we've been through this. Everytime we have to
change the project. We've got a development team that's in place that at
least we kind of know what it is. I know we'll add at lease one partner
but we haven't, if we can work from some kind of standard agreement that
we've all been working on. That would be the project. I'm just like you,
I would like to see this thing done and if it's possible to do it this way,
we can do it this way. If somebody comes along between now and then, fine.
But we're going to need that.
Horn: Other questions?
Chmiel: I guess you answered that one for me. We have, the City will have
a total assistance into this particular proposal then of about
$1,274,000.00 as indicated in here.
Ashworth: That's what has really been on the table. In fact it actually
is reduced. At one point in time we were looking to subsidy to the grocer
of $220,000.00 per year. Up to $220,000.00 per year for 3 years which was
660. That, in the current fashion has been negotiated down to'a flat 500
and one of the issues back to Deloitte is, does Gateway really need that
amount of money? Are they blowing smoke at us or not? Deloitte's position
was that they feel comfortable that Gateway in fact anticipates losing
dollars during those early years. That the amount that we're providing
does not fully replenish the losses that they will look to but they're
taking a realistic look at the marketplace. Secondarily that they are
trying to be a good partner to the development in that the numbers themself
would better support a 3ubilee versus the Festival. And it's been through
our efforts to ask for that larger store, that they've maintained that in
there even though it has hurt their overall P & L statement. What staff
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 9
has been trying to do is number one, we did not want to see the subsidy
level increase. You know that just did not seem to, there has to be some
other way to get the project going without increasing subsidy. The thought
of our literally becoming an investor in the project has the benefit that
hopefully we will be getting a return on that investment just as if we were
investing in whatever. By looking at it as an investment rather than a
subsidy, hopefully we can get rid of the stymie that the dollars are going
to them. Instead this is an investment for us more so than a subsidy for
them. Third, I think we've got to find some technique to get the project
rolling because the shoe is on the other foot at this point in time. For 2
or 3 years, 5 years we've been trying to get a grocery store and get a
commitment from them. Now they're coming back to us and saying we gave you
the commitment. We're willing to build. If you don't make this project
happen Mr. Developer by August 1st, our commitment is gone. I think that
it's at least worth pursuing. Meaning taking the next 2 week period of
time. Let the developer finalize their partnership as Clayton is referring
to. Let staff finalize the numbers. Set any additional numbers to you
that you would like. Verify that we do not have any legal barriers in this
process and come back in 2 weeks and say, do we have a project or don't we.
That's assuming that you're willing to pursue this concept further.
Horn: Would someone like to make a motion to that affect?
Robbins: I will. I would direct staff to pursue, based on the other
presentation we've had, to pursue the agreement as stated.
Horn: Is there a second?
Bohn: I'll second.
Horn: Further discussion?
Robbins moved, Bohn seconded to direct staff to pursue finalizing an
agreement for the Market Square development and bring it back to the HRA in
2 weeks. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Robbins: What type of time table are me looking at if we do get an
agreement written up?
Brad 3ohnson: I think we're kind of... I think August 1st is a reasonable
time, plus or minus. You don't know if we're going to have title problems
or whatever you run into. Some problems with some of the agreements that
the lender may have. Wouldn't you think August 1st is a reasonable time
period for this type of transaction? Because our construction loan will
probably come from Amcon's bank so that's a quicky. That's about a 30 day
bank. It's a Lutheran Brotherhood process. The other thing I could do, if
you'd like, this investment we're talking about is a typical investment
that a pension plan is willing to do normally, if they've got the money so
we could have somebody who's doing you know from the mortgage banking side
of it...how they look at it. People who are in fudiciary relationship are
using sort of your funds that you put away in your pension plans to get
into deals like this at this point. Most the lenders think this is a great
time to go into real estate because you're coming in at a relatively
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 10
unleveraged position in comparison to what the world has seen in the past
so. We've been very lucky also, which says something about our projects.
Ne have no projects in default in Chanhassen. They're all cashflowi~g. I
mean we're not overbuilt. Maybe one now that I think about it, but anyway.
That's...and all our projects were after 1986. Because of that we were
forced into each time to meet the then lender's requirements.
Chmiel: Yeah, we have one project that's in default right now.
Robbing: Brad, when you come back with this, would you come back with a
time table of what's going to take place from time to time?
Brad 3ohnson: I can give you a pert chart that is subject to the world you
know be~ting up on us. There's little things. Anybody that knows Bernie,
we've asked Bernie for his financials now, to even copy Don and these guys
so I don't get in trouble in this one but I have yet to get the financials
from Bernie for example. He's just slow at reacting to all that kind of
stuff. Those are the little things that go' on that just slow things down.
I asked him for them for, because I know he comes in and says, you guys are
doing nothing so I'll start copying you when we ask for things so when he
calls and says something you can say hey, wait a minute.
Chmiel: I guess I'd like to see something firm that you're really looking
at tying everything down.
Brad 3ohnson: Yeah, I just say in a real estate transaction, to close it,
there's a real mine field. It has nothing to do with commitment. It has
to do with titles and things that you just can't, we think we're close. Ne
have a title binder don't we on that project? I think we're pretty close
because we were all set to close.
Clayton Johnson: Probably the least of our problems.
Brad Johnson: Yeah, and the partnership agreement I think can get together
fairly quickly so in real life.
Chmiel: As I indicated my frustration last time. I guess I really want to
see something get moving.
Brad 3ohnson: I think we all do and I appreciate what you say and we'll
get that done.
Clayton 3ohnson: I think another thing. When we get to Phase 2, we reach
some sort of agreement, there's a major financial commitment. Probably
another $40,000.00 to $50,000.00 that takes place at that time so...any
further unless there's a very good chance of a quick closing.
Brad 3ohnson: Yeah, I might mention. Just to make the application to
Lutheran Brotherhood and do a couple of things is about a $40,000.00
commitment. Just that. That's I think what we want to dance around a
little bit for a couple days here to see what we have. Not just to
Lutheran Brotherhood but there's a bunch of lawyers we have to turn on.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 11
REOUEST FOR ASSISTANCE TO PURCHASE BUILDING ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WEST
78TH STREET AND GREAT pLAINS BLVD, (M)KE SORENSON BUILDING). BERNIE HANSON.
Horn: Do we have anything on this Don? Has it changed since your staff
report?
Ashworth: I've received nothing additional from Bernie.
Horn: I think the recommendation is to table it. I would accept a motion
to table.
Chmiel moved, Horn seconded to table the request for assistance to purchase
the building on the northwest corner of Nest 78th Street and Great Plains
Blvd.. Ali voted in favor and the motion carried. The item was tabled.
Robbins: Oh, did Clayton leave? I was going to ask him about the
restaurant?
Chmiel: Clayton, can you come back in here?
Ashworth: Paging Clayton. Paging Clayton.
Clayton 3ohnson: Update on the restaurant?
Robbins: Yes.
Clayton Johnson: We just, there's a set of plans that have just been
received. A revision that's got to go through the Planning Department
which we don't expect to have a problem with. The funds are in place to
build the shell. The restaurant itself is still a problem because at
today's lending, basically what you have to do to get a restaurant is you
have to build a restaurant. You have to furnish it and if you're lucky you
may get somebody to come in and fry the hamburgers for you. So basically
we are going to have to furnish the restaurant totally, including the
kitchen in order to get an operator in to run it. 'And we think we can do
that. We know we can build the shell but we think we have enough funds
also to furnish and put in a restaurant. We have an agreement that we have
reached in principle with an operator. It's an operator that operates a
number of restaurants around the metropolitan area quite successfully but
one of the reasons they're successful is they have very little equity
invested in any one of them. We're receiving a lot of encouragement from
the hotel partners because the hotel's going very well and they feel a
restaurant would add both to the average room rate as well as the occupancy
so Herb got the plans back Monday of this week. I believe he submitted
them to the Building Department or will be for final review. Then we were
hoping to get building permit and start building.
Chmiel: Do you have any timeframe?
Clayton 3ohnson: We would hope to be in the ground. We are out rebidding
the project right now with the change in the plans. We're rebidding it at
the same time it's being submitted to the Building Department. So we're
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 12
looking to build the shell and get that going even without the restaurant
lease in place.
Bohn: What time period is that?
Clayton 3ohnson: Certainly built this summer. Within a week or two. As
soon as we get a building permit.
Gerhardt: That's a 2 week process.
Clayton Johnson: Well it's already been through everything though Todd. I
mean I really would hope it wouldn't take them another 2 or 3 weeks.
Gerhardt: I gave you a week...
PLANNING FOR DOWNTOWN PARC[L$/q~ARTON ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES.,
Ashworth: As part of the, back up a little bit. Barton Aschman are the
consulting engineers that were selected by the State of Minnesota for each
of the design phases for TH 5 as it comes through the community. We turned
around and also employed Barton Aschman recognizing our desire to insure
that the highway improvements were coordinated with what it is we wanted to
do and then to present some alternatives in terms of what it is that we
might want to do. As a part of that, Barry Warner has been in front of you
before. Barry had presented the various alternatives associated with the
entry monument and each of the two walls. I thought that they did an
excellent'job in terms of making that presentation and getting all of us to
kind of visualize what might be occurring at each of those entry areas.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority is invited to participate with the
City Council and Planning Commission on 3une Sth where we're going to be
going up and down TH 5 and trying to take a look at what we have along TH 5
at this point in time. What might occur on there in the future. Hopefully
you've gotten the report from myself that kind of talks about that June 8th
date and Barry will be one of us. One who will be 3oining us on that date
along with A1Moresh over through the University of Minnesota. He also
specializes in that area. Since Barry had successfully brought to the
table various projects for us, I asked Barry to take a look at potential
for a downtown park. I think that has been a statement that's been made by
more than one HRA member over the years. Potentially right in front of
City Hall. Quite truthfully, the thing that has always bothered me about
that is it's a relatively narrow piece of property. You know to have a
downtown park kind of like Chaska and the gazebo and they have the band
shell and they have the band in the summer and they do the little thing
with the Chamber but it's a nice sized piece of property. And this piece,
where the old bank is and the vacant lot to the west of that is just kind
of a long thin piece of property. In talking with Barry and one of the
things that we started kicking around is, what would happen if you took the
street out and you enveloped this whole area as kind of a park? Now I'm
starting to get into Barry's presentation because as we started kicking
some of this around and we started doing some bubble art, I said well this
is exactly the type of thing that the HRA has been talking about. Keep the
think a rougher form. I'll call it the bubble art type. It's a little
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 13
fancier and bring it in. Show the HRA what you've done so far. Maybe
we're going somewhere. Maybe we're not. With that Barry Warner.
Barry Warner: The North Stars are down 4 to 1. I just wanted to let you
know that.
Chmiel: We have it on cable but we're not telling you that.
Barry Warner: As Don pointed out, we have prepared a presentation which
looks at soliciting your input back based upon some very preliminary
concept plans for a civic park that would be located right out in front of
City Hall. What I'm going to do is give to you some of the issues and
opportunities as a foreshadow and then step into some various alternatives.
And again, the purpose for the alternatives is to touch the edge of what
could be considered here to see if we can't jointly trip something that
everybody, that hits everybody's fancy and feels good. If we take a look
at the study area, that being this area shown in green. It's flanked by
Kerber Blvd., by Market, by 78th and by Coulter. However, it's really part
of a bigger civic campus if you will because by the time you take a look at
the active park area that exists to the north, the City Hall flanked by
it's parking. The bank, the Post Office and the Fire Department, it really
makes sense to perhaps consider this as a larger civic space in which there
should be some public open space that could be programmed for some civic
activities or some viewed on space to set the presence for the building and
so on. One of the ironic things that as TH 5 is improved, suddenly this
space becomes much more present especially when you're eastbound on the
roadway. Coming over the railroad and so on. This is much more visible
than it has been in the past. When we take a look at some of the existing
conditions, as I mentioned the active portion of the park exists to the
north of City Hall. There's about a 20~ change in grade between the back
of City Hall and Coulter Drive and that goes right through City Hall.
That's where the break is. Currently an undeveloped space that's west,
located over here as well as within this portion just west of the Snyder
Building. The 78th Street streetscape really sets the presence for some
additional civic open space here as a nice front door. Central road...cuts
the area really in two and it serves as a major divider as a result for
this site so if this site could ever be linked with the remainder of that
civic open space, it's logical that either that roadway would change it's
form or else that it goes away entirely. I talked about the clustering of
these facilities together so they really provide a campus like environment.
If we take a look at some logical goals and objectives in trying to make
this space fit into the remainder of it, first of all we'd like to unify
this area so that it creates more as one then it might have in the past.
That this green space, however it might be programmed, really provides a
setting for City Hall and any future expansion that might occur as is
needed by the City. That we should, as a result, provide a vision for what
this space should become at some point in the future. Either preserve that
opportunity now or that at least we have a decision point made here. It
makes sense at some point in the future. It makes sense now or it doesn't
make sense. We also in this space would like to incorporate some
recognizable images of Chanhassen. We talked a little bit about that when
we looked at the gateways. What is Chanhassen now? What will it be in the
future and so on and try to present some of those images in this space. To
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 14
provide a civic space which has useable facilities. Basically a flexible
open space so that community events with the 4th of July festivities,
whether it be music in the park or what have you, can occur in a space like
this that's part of a larger civic open space. That we reduce pedestrian
or auto/pedestrian conflict areas that might occur as part of the city hall
complex and to create perhaps an in town central park for Chanhassen
residents. I touched...
Horn: Ne were just commenting that possibly one of those monuments you
could put in there could be a nice looking clock like Chaska has.
Barry Warner: What I'm going to do is go through a series of alternatives
and we'll kind of work through those to understand what some of their pros
and cons are. And again, what we're trying to do here is touch the edge.
Some of them have strengths. Some of them have very strong weaknesses but
I think you'll understand very quickly where some of them may lie. The
first one would basically allow Coulter Drive to stay in place. However,
we have provided immediately in front of City Hall a motor circle that
would give a little more prominence to City Hall. It's a plaza but it
would allow some traffic to go back and forth through there. It would also
serve as a very logical drop off area. The majority of this property then
would be used as a viewed on space. However, there are open areas of which
those could be programmed for some type of civic function and this area
could either be a pool, it could be a landscaped area that would be very
rigid. It could be a rose garden. Some of that nature. $o again we have
civic or open spaces that would flank a very strong spine. A motor court
but all of this is intended to give more of a setting for City Hall. The
second scheme is much more irregular. Much more free form in it's
orientation. It would try to capitalize upon that great transition that
occurs through the City Hall area by providing a band shell or amphitheatre
or something to the westerly side of the City Hall. And in this area we
might also incorporate a plaza that would not only sit on the south side of
City Hall but also perhaps walk this way and link in some kind of an
ampitheatre or band shell and so on. The remainder of this space however
would stay highly unprogrammed. It would be basically organic in it's
design allowing for a very free flowing sidewalks or walkways. A landscape
space but I think the attribute of this area is that it basically stays
unprogrammed and would be very flexible for any kind of civic uses that
might be appropriate for the area. We call this the crows foot concept.
It's a very traditional approach where it has strong axial orientation
towards the City Hall. Again, the City Hall trying to be the most
prominent element in. the civic open space. Again we have open a~eas that
could be programmed for perhaps a band shelter. Perhaps an ampitheatre.
Perhaps carnivals or evening music or any number of different things but
again flexible in orientation but having a very rigid framework which sets
the City Hall at the end of this access. Again we would have some type of
a central plaza that would be on the south side of City Hall. This is
somewhat similar but instead of having City Hall being the only
orientation, we would have open space broken into quadrants. Oval in shape
with the plaza being moved south through City Hall so it's really the focal
point for all the open space rather than just for the building. We might
again have an opportunity just to the west of the building for an
opportunity within this central area for some type of a band shell. For
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 15
some type of a large gazebo or something of that nature if that's
consistent with what the community's needs are for progammed open space.
The other element that's part of this concept is that with dropping Coulter
Drive, we might consider some type of a drop off area for City Hall. In
this case we've located it on the north side of the building so that some
type of roadway may in fact link back from Market Street to Kerber with a
drop off area in this location, tt also would allow 3 parking areas to
exist and possibly a fourth if that was appropriate. Scheme E has some
obvious weaknesses but I think it's worthwhile illustrating anyway. We
felt at one point that it would be a strong concept to provide some
presence for the building by having an immediate access off West 78th. And
input from staff alerted us to the fact that the intersections at 78th
with Market and Kerber were needed to the point where we might overload an
area like this, especially for traffic that is destined to the north. I
think that it does have strength. It gives the building a lot of presence,
especially with the open space immediately in front of the building. A
stron~ orientation right off the access. However, your traffic consultant
may agree that those intersections would be needed to keep circulation and
provide access further to the north of the city for the civic campus.
Scheme F would provide a very large open area that would provide again that
presence for the building. In this case we've allowed for a larger plaza
that would be on the south side of City Hall that would provide a small
intimate area that might provide a seating area. Perhaps an area for a
sculpture or fountain. Something of that nature. However, that is offset
by a very large open space flanked by a mosque of trees in all directions.
Again, this might be open at some point on the south so we provide as much
visibility of the building as possible and yet a very strong hedge that
would be adjacent to'the street system. So you can see that we've tried to
go in a variety of different directions here to test, to see what feels
good and try to gain some input from staff as well as yourselves to terms
of what are the real needs in front of City Hall. What facilities should
we provide when any type of civic events would be programmed for the area.
Some of the physical opportunities that we might capitalize upon and so on.
So those are some of the initial ideas we had for this phase if Coulter
could be closed. If the Snyder Building would be raised and the entire
parcel purchased.
Horn: Could you just flip through those one more time? Relatively
quickly.
Barry Warner: It gets to be a blur after a while.
Horn: We have trouble with two options. I don't know what we'd do with F
options.
Barry Warner: The first one allows for a motor park right in front of the
building. It retains Coulter Drive. Has either a reflective pool or
landscaping flanked by some open space. We've also shown that obviously
the building's going to be expanded in some direction... This is the most
free form. It allows for an ampitbeatre oT band shell to be tucked back
into the slope and that would be offset by a very open area that'd be in
front of the building. This is the crows foot concept. Again very axial
in nature...oval shape allowing for criscross circulation. The focal point
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 16
would be either a band shell, a large seating area. Some type of a small
building or something of that nature that could serve as a focal,point for
this open area flanked by trees. And that's fair to say. And the reason
we do this is to draw...a central access point back from Market and to
Kerber. Retaining an open space in front of the building and flanking all
of City Hall by a plaza. Obviously there would have to be some stepped...
because of the grades. The creation of a large unprogrammed area flanked
by camps of trees and a very articulated plaza Just south of the building
that provides some very intimate spaces...
Robbins: Barry? Go back to Scheme E and B I think or something. Now just
personally, I guess when we're looking at that. To me that would make a
little bit of sense without the traffic. 3ust allowing a walk path. In
other words, 3ust make that a walk path because we're talking about always
tying in the trails around here so if you did a situation like that, that
would enhance people to walk it. To walk around but that road to me would
become a walking path only.
Horn: You still need streets on the side.
Robbins: Yeah, there could be streets on the side but then.
Barry Warner: You're saying keeping these open and then allowing a
principal walkway.
Robbins: Just basically a walkway.
Bohn: I thought that with O too.
Robbins: Yeah, okay back to D now.
Bohn: See you've got a path.
Barry Warner: I think your point is well taken though. No matter which
scheme is selected...
Robbins: Go back to C. I think it's either C or B with the band shelter.
Horn: B.
Robbins: Well yeah, both B and C. I guess to me if you're going to put a
band shell or something.
Bohn: There's a walking path in that one too.
Robbins: There's walking in there but you've got to be careful about the
parking because you don't want a lot of people walking around if there's
roads too. You've got make sure you've got walking to it that's safe
walking. Walking without a lot of traffic close by.
Barry Warner: I think one...the concepts do a number of different things.
They show us how we can articulate the open space. They show us that
there's a lot of flexibility in terms of what kind of elements can be
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 17
programmed into it and I think what we collectively need to do is determine
what facilities are appropriate to have in a space like this to help give
the building presence. To provide maximum flexibility for any type of
civic events and what do you hear from your citizenry in terms of needs. Do
they want a music in the park evening in the summer? Do they want civic
activities like a 4th of July celebration? Centennial celebration and so
on that logically wants to fall in a civic area like this and so on and
then try to offset that by saying, well when it's not being used it still
has to look good. It is your space that's intended to draw attention to
City Hall and really becomes part of the civic campus.
Horn: Did you pick some preferences Don?
Chmiel: No. I have a lot of questions in my mind that come immediately.
We put in Coulter Drive through how many years ago? We also provided
another parking area by public, safety with access to their. Put a lot ot:
dollar investment into what we have already. I have some concerns about
redoing everything we've just done. It should be there for a few years. I
don't think this supports a total amount of parking for that facility.
There's a lack of parking availability for trying to do everything we're
talking about doing. I think the concept and idea of the park in itself I
think might be good but I don't know. It sort of just leaves me just a
little bit cold yet. What we have here not things that I see would be best
suited for that specific location. We have a lot of park area in the back
of course. Just blending a park all the way straight through. We're still
not going to, if we do something as such we're still not providing enough
parking for the areas when the kids are playing baseball. We've got them
all up and down Kerber which is fine. It doesn't hurt it because that's
wide enough but I'd have to start thinking a little bit more the negatives
I've thrown out right now.
Ashworth: The road was built in 1978 is my recollection. The one here in
front. All of the plans would be premised on our ability to obtain a curb
cut off of Kerber Blvd. over here and coming into the upper parking lot.
That may have some benefit in being able to double the size of one or more
of these parking areas. Again, you'd have to look at some of your
recreational use and make sure that you weren't reducing any of that.
Horn: To follow up on what Don was eluding to, is it necessary or do most
people have their city park adjacent to City Hall?
Bohn: Chaska doesn't.
Horn: I know.
BaTTy Warner: Well, I want to be careful when we say civic park or city
park because the way parks are categorized now, they have community parks
and you have neighborhood parks and athletic facilities. And a true city
park I think of as something more like this. This has the strong presence
within a more public space. A civic space. The most tYpical city park I
would think is in St. Peter, Minnesota. They have a park that's right on
169 that says this is a big city park. If you have a festival and you
drove there or you have a big family renunion and go there, it is the park
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 18
in town. This would give the City Hall I think a nice, shall I say.
Chmiel: Add aesthetics to it?
Barry Warner: Well yes. It would provide aesthetics in terms of visual
foreshadow but it would give, compared to the intensity that occurs here.,
it gives a nice open space contrast. It also could be programmed I think
very easily for some of the festivals that apparently are going on in the
community at various times in the summer.
Chmiel: What is the size of that?
Barry Warner: Well this is at 50 scale and let's take a look at this.
Robbins: I guess just back to the park idea. We've got the hotel that's
across the street. More and more people are there and for people just
going out for a walk at night, currently there's not really a lot of
walking spots as such to go walk to. This would give them a spot to go
walk to. Secondly, if Market Square takes off, people there, shopping
there. They see a park next door might be inclined to just walk across the
street and see what's going on over there. I think with some walking and
extra space, you'll see a lot of people wanting to walk over there. That's
why I'm personally saying about a walking path inside of it. Kind of a
more structured look so you can walk along the flowers or walk along the
bushes or something.
Barry Warner: This is about 250 x 500. Now I also want to pursue the
other thing. Why should we have a space like this? If we take a look at
the negative that, let's take a look at what other uses could go in there
if we don't program it for a civic space. It's doubtful that you're going
to want to develop anything of significant density in front of the
City Hall because that's when you totally erase it from 78th and from the
community. Basically at that point it then becomes blocked from view. It
still is part of a civic campus if you will but it doesn't have the
presence...which is really true in this case. One could develop on either
side of this open space. Flank it and still provide views of City Hall but
you'd have to be very careful in terms of if private development space
occurs here, if that provides the same level of quality you're hoping to
attain as a part of the community and as part of the civic area.
Chmiel: There's a lot of landscaping through the area, at least during the
spring, summer and fall, that once those trees grew would sort of soften
City Hall to a certain point but then at the same time they're also going
to be covering it after periods of years once those trees start growing.
You're not going to see it.
Horn: That's a good idea.
Barry Warner: I think we need to visionaries a little bit too. Another
reason to try to preserve this is to preserve your opportunities for the
future because as we grow and become more sophisticated as people, it seems
like we always need more space for something. This City Hall could come
out here at some point and actually be flanked by parking on both sides.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 19
If we take a look at 20, 30, 40 years hence. So it does preserve the
opportunity at lesat for the City in the future. I think that has merit as
well. And in the interim use it for some civic open space. Unfortunately,
if you do commit this, it may either cost you more or those opportunities
may slip by. This isn't the watershed decision but it certainly is
something we should anticipate.
Robbins: Will you turn to D?
Barry Warner: Okay. It's kind of an easter egg but it has some nice
balance... It's very traditional.
Robbins: And you could put a parking lot on the west side then like you
have on the east?
Barry Warner: Yes, very definitely. In fact, you'll notice as I flipped
through the concepts that we allowed some things to occurs in some and not
in others because it allows the reviewer to kind of see some...
Chmiel: With the concept of the downtown, do we want something
traditional?
Barry Warner: I would say that West 78th is a looser approach, if it's not
a real articulated streetscape. The way it's planted and the way it's been
designed, it's a very informal approach. This would provide a distinct
contrast to that and I would say that based upon that, you could have the
spaces laid out this way but you may want to plant it maybe in a looser
finish. This really becomes a...That's why we said at the beginning...78th
really provides a...civic area.
Horn: Plus I think you lose your concept of a large open space with this
because it seems, it closes in your areas to smaller spaces. It's like a
house with a lot of small rooms.
Barry Warner: And the point you're making about 78th, and you were too, if
you want to take some elements of that and bring it back in here so at
least there are some common denominators. Lighting might be one area. We
may not have to follow all the designs themes of 78th but try to bring some
of those common denominators back in here so at least it reads as one and
it reinforces some of the investments you've made. It takes the strengths
and maybe we pass by the weaknesses.
Horn: Well my first choice is B and second is D but I have a strong
preference for the first one.
Barry Warner: B or D?
Horn: B. Jim?
Bohn: It's hard to make up. What I like about D is that road linking,
having the drop off on the north side of City Hall. Because in a way we
have a reception area. Not a reception area but a foyer up there that
would be more used that's open to both parts of City Hall.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 20
Horn: Why does B preclude doing that?
Barry Warner: It doesn't necessarily do that. I want to point out, we
don't have any ground rules here so it's not we're going to buy A. We're
going to buy C or whatever. You can take parts of each of those and merge
them together. Test it and see if it works and bring something back to you
that provides a hybrid but to a greater level of detail that kind of tests
out, now does this feel comfortable. That's what the intention of this
exercise is.
Horn: I think that's a good point on D. That road access up there.
Bohn: The road in the back? It makes a lot of sense.
Chmiel: Providing it doesn't get in the way of the activity there.
Bohn: It'd be more of a driveway. It wouldn't be a street. It'd be a
driveway.
Barry Warner: And that's a good point. We tried to examine in house, this
is park, this is potential park. Do we want to link it together? ...a lot
of pedestrian movement? Well, no matter whether there is or not, we can
concentrate that at points either adjacent to streets or adjacent to
buildings and still allow that to occur. But the way your parking needs
are and will be in the future, we've got to provide parking someplace and I
still think we can accommodate the pedestrian movement in a nice manner
whatever it may be. The other element is that there may not be a lot of
pedestrian traffic except for on a very heavily programmed festival day or
something where you're going to use festival space both north and south.
But on a typical day, this is active and this is passive and the users
really aren't the same. In fact, from some thoughts, this becomes a nice
transition or nice buffer between, let's have music on Wednesday night in
June. Oh, by the way there's a softball tournament...
Bohn: That's why it'd be almost nice to have two parking lots on both
sides. Two lower ones would help take care of that park and the two upper
ones would take care of the other park.
Horn: Well, I think you could probably put a curb on this side too if you
needed to.
Ashworth: One of the things about this plan that I really like was this
amphitheater. Being able to take advantage of that 20 foot hill we have.
Set it back in there and people could be using that area and really not,
they'd be far enough away from the traffic on 78th Street where you could
do your concerts in the summer. You could have the type of thing we had
down by the Church... You could build little planters where people could
literally sit at the same time...
Bohn: Show that D again with the drive thru in the back. That would be
just a street with access to a parking lot.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 21
Barry Warner: As we see this, this would be a low volume roadway who's
only function would be a primary function would be to allow drop offs in
this area.
Bohn: Or to get to a parking lot.
Barry Warner: And to provide access to these parking lots. One of the
things we've got to do obviously is make these parking lots work given that
grade transition and we need to test that a little bit further but we're
trying to be sensitive in the way that transition is meant to occur in this
green area much like it does now but we may change the orientation.
Horn: Any other comments?
Brad 3ohnson: Can I say something?
Hot n: Sur e.
Brad Johnson: Just from a downtown point. On the way out on the plane,
have any of you ever been Rivinia?
Barry Warner: Yes.
Brad Johnson: There's an article I'll send over here and that's been there
for years and they've got a little outside band shelter and it's like B.
Where they have lawns and then people come in and they, you know when we
sponsored that little concert thing down here. One of the reasons it
didn't go, it went over well as much but one of the reasons it didn't go
very well was because people wanted grass to put a blanket down to come in
and just sitting around. They don't necessarily want to sit on a rigid
spot to watch that. I think from a retailers point of view, if you could
get the community to sponsor one night a week or something and you could
get like the Minnesota Orchestra or what do they call them, the little
ones. Come in and do something in the downtown area, that would help our
retail. Get people to sponsor it. You could be a really big deal. I also
think that the City Hall may have to expand that way. I look at Minnetonka
City Hall currently. It's huge. They've been there for, you might need
space. I think from a practical point of view~ looking at that sewer line
out here, the soil conditions there are terrible. Am I right? Any time
you put a sewer line across something and then all the land around it falls
in, it indicates that's an old pothole or something. Am I right? Why is
that like that?
Ashworth: I think it's just developed that way around there. That's
always been a farm.
Brad 3ohnson: Because we ran into two spots in town here you know that we
can't build on and one was where, they were literally. One was where the
Cleaners is. Behind.
8ohn: Tom Klingelhutz used to skate on that spot...
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 22
Brad Johnson: That one...and then we've got the same problem down at the,
because I had to do a soil test there so that might be a good park forever.
I think it'd be just great for the downtown. If you do a band shell
though, one input is that it would be good if it was covered in some
fashion ail the time because they sit up and it rains and so you probably
have to do something that actually did.
Bohn: Birds have a good place to land too.
Brad Johnson: My hometown did one that was uncovered. Spent a lot of
money and it was...
Horn: Charlie, what's your preference?
Robbins: Well, I think it's going to have to...we all have various parts
of this we all like and I think a blending of them is probably going to get
what we want. I do like the access to the north. It separates the cars.
That makes some sense. Personally I like the way that well either this one
or a couple of the other ones have some walk paths in it. I like that.
This is perhaps to me a touch more structured than necessary. That doesn't
mean that it's wlong. It's just that it's a touch more. Then again I see
a lot more people, as we have more and more people working downtown and
we're going to get more people in downtown'with Market Square and with the
hotel. People will be more and more staying here. More and more
businesses. You'll have this being used more and more because I worked 20
years downtown and I know all about people that walk to Loring Park. Walk
to the Guthrie. Walk down the mall. Walk to Peavy Plaza. Walked all of
those and you do that. Every day and you get more and more people doing
that. If you have a draw like this, you'll have all kinds of people
running around. I think that would be a draw so put some paths into it.
Make it a little bit unstructured more. Put the parking in the back. The
flowers with walking through it. The band shell. All these things will
work out.
Bohn: Then it'd be nice to have a senior citizens west of Market Blvd..
Horn: So we can play cards?
Chmiel: No, botchy ball.
Bohn: Seniors citizens walking across the street to the park. They don't
get run over on Market Blvd..
Robbing: So Clark, it's not that I have a preference for any one. There's
features of all of them I 'think that makes a lot of sense.
Horn: Okay, any other comments? Do you have the direction you're looking
for?
Barry Warner: Is there anything that you don't want? I feel that you
didn't have a strong preference for water? You didn't want... You didn't
want a central access or enclosure.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 23
Robbins: I do like the access on the other one that showed the horseshoe
one where there's again, it's showed to be a car path but you could make
that a pedestrian path and not put cars on it and just be able to access
walking along the sidewalk there. That one shows it that way too I
believe.
Chmiel: If you were to do something as such, I too would prefer seeing B
but I like that drop off area.
Bohn: Yeah, that's what I like.
Chmiel: Because it sort of blends into that and that makes it softer right
there.
Barry Warner: Another strength of this is that anything, if we want a
harder, more intimate area...nice contrast.
Bohn: If we had to add on to City Hall, which obviously we will in the
future.
Ashworth: That's really been taken. This building has been designed so it
could be a mirror image...
Robbins: Don? With the expansion of City Hall, I'm just asking more of a
general question. Is there any reason why it has to expand horizontal as
opposed to vertical?
Ashworth: You mean make an additional story?
Robbins: Yeah.
Ashworth: Quite frankly I can't see, see we haven't really finished off
the lower level down in here. In addition, construction of this segment
should provide sufficient square footage to go through our existing...
timeframe of the year 2020...
Robbins: The library wouldn't be in there anyway.
Horn: The library will be over here. Anything else?
Barry Warner: Yeah, one other note in the presentation, unless you have
other questions.
Robbins: I like sidewalks coming in at the corner like that. Corners of
Kerber and people cross the street and get right into the park.
Ashworth: Sometime when you're out on TH 5, with the new addition, look
over. It's amazing the presence that City Hall has from the highway. Any
of these plans really insures that you kind of protect that into the
future. It also guarantees that this whole area is really governmental
services or institutional. We have the bank but you know, the post office,
the fire station, the school, City Hall. It really does designate this
entire area as institutional.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 24
Chmiel: I think what would be good too in showing those trees, take into
consideration trees that you'd be planting would be in the height of 20 and
25 feet in height. Nothing much taller because then it would deter from
what's existing as well which is the building.
Bohn: Don't we want to hide the building?
Chmiel: Not necessarily. Well, to a point yeah.
Bohn: It's not the nicest looking building in town.
Chmiel: We want to have people find City Hall.
Bohn: One thing I like about having that park though is City Hall would be
on main street then. If we ever get to change the name of it.
Chmiel: If it slides down here.
Ashworth: The second area that I had ask Barry to take and make a short
presentation on and I know everyone wants to leave but with the acquisition
of Taco and Red-E-Mix, what are future land uses that we're going to look
to in that whole area? What are some of the type of constraints that we
have and I thought it'd be good just to start the process to kind of look
at some of those constraints and start exploring ideas early before we get
private pressure to do one thing or another. So that we can kind of take
the lead role as to that whole area. I'm sorry, go ahead.
Barry Warner: This exercise is again intended to stimulate some
conversation and a little bit of brainstorming. We haven't generated
alternatives for the uses but we tried to provide you with some
opportunities for constraints that we feel that this'area right in here
affords. What I'd like to do is kind of set the context for us and then we
can talk about some of the uses that we think make sense and some that we
think shouldn't be considered. This is a very long, linear parcel
obviously. Red-E-Mix site is approximately here. Taco Shop is back in
here. TH 5 with it's new improvements are shown in this area and we've
also shown in our mapping the new TH lO1 intersection. So that provides a
totally different configuration than currently the area provides. I think
that provides a good visual... If we take a step back and take a look at
some of the other land uses, obviously the church cemetary, with single
family residence. We have some very automobile, truck related facilities
over here. Basically a vacant parcel and Amoco over here. This is
primarily single family and I think that's important to keep in mind in
terms of what uses are likely to change. What uses are unlikely to change.
Some of the physical constraints is that this site has real distinct access
to circulation limitations. As we take a look at access from the east,
it's basically a right in situation. If this access point would be
retained and provided as a part of reconstruction of this intersection.
You might also have right out so you can see that really constrains if that
would be provided. Access from the west of Great Plains Blvd. is equally
limiting because of the length of this cul-de-sac. Basically...1 inch
equal 60 feet so that is some distance and we're also coming in on a very
long, narrow bottleneck area. You talk about the long, narrow parcel
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 25
shape. This is about 175 feet in width. It varies a little bit so that
poses some real significant constraints to any type of building that could
go in there. And it also is about 4 acres in size. The railroad corridor
poses some restrictions as well. We currently have a single track which is
running through here and that limits some of the pedestrian linkage that
might occur between this area back to the rest of the business area. It
also poses some limitation in terms of how this parcel relates to some of
those other parcels. And yet that's important because when we take a look
at these green areas, that's really land that's owned by the City in one
shape, form or another. If we consider some of the opportunities,
obviously it's proximity to other city parcels really provides the strength
of this area. Suddenly there might be a great opportunity if we can seize
it in a program. It's basically a flat, buildable site. Some of the grade
changes as we go further to the west on it. Especially in front of the
trucking road here. The greatest strength is it's visibility from Th 5.
It not only has strong views for westbound traffic and for eastbound
traffic but we also have presence along TH 5 for some frontage and I think
that certainly is it's greatest strength. That and perhaps it's proximity
to the rest of the business district. If we start taking looks at options,
maybe the best way to do this is to look...
(There was a tape change at this point in the meeting.)
Ashworth: ...one of the real questions becomes, can we look into a future
ball and say that the railroad track will be out of there. See if the
railroad were out of there, it changes everything.
Chmiel: I don't think you're ever going to see that.
Ashworth: I don't think so either.
Horn: Why are we, it's not relevant to this but why is there talk of a
concept of a senior citizen center?
Chmiel: There's a study going on now?
Horn: I always anticipated that would be part of the community center.
Why would we have a separate thing for that? It doesn't make sense.
Ashworth: It's becoming more of kind of the "in" thing. More seniors are
literally requesting, demanding that type of facility. The questionnaire
that we did this past year showed that there's a great deal of support for
that type of facility. Right now we're trying to quantify exactly what
does a great deal of support mean? We really don't know.
Chmiel: What are the needs?
Horn: Well we find out every time we have a referendum.
Chmiel: That's why we're going through the process of study to see if it's
even warranted.
Horn: I can't see having a separate facility.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 26
Bohn: I don't either.
Ashworth: But I don't think a referendum for a community center is
something that's going to occur in the next 5 years.
Horn: You don't?
Ashworth: I guess after having it gone down and recognizing the closeness
of the Chaska facility.
Horn: I think when some of the newer people get established, there will be
more demand for it. The newer people haven't been here long enough to have
much of an influence. They'll demand it once it comes to that. Start
getting a little older. It's too late for me but.
Ashworth: The other point that I wanted to bring out as a part of this is,
that whole east end is going to change so dramatically. I mean with
removal of Taco, with removal of Red-E-Mix. With the shifting of the
roadway. You're going to create large expanses of city owned property as
we've gone through and purchased the apartment complex and Bongard property
and Taco and Red-E-Mix and part of the Hanus. Again, 'we're not coming back
we've got any specific ideas as to how that might be used but I think we
should start the planning process early. At least come in like we did
tonight and show you kind of some of the constraints that are there and
some of the things we're looking at.
Chmiel: Yeah, there's a lot of problems with that whole area.
Horn: That's a good area for the flower group. Put in some.
Chmiel: A lot of flowers.
Bohn: I think that...property would be ideal for senior citizens.
Horn: Not today it wouldn't. It's too busy on that street.
Bohn: No, but once it's.
Chmiel: We have to remember we're trying to get the senior citizen area
closely located to all their basic needs within the downtown.
Bohn: Church and cemetary?
Chmiel: Church, shopping center, pizza place. No, we're going to keep
them living. They're not dying to get in there yet but.
Bohn: The library'd be close.
Barry Warner: Where is the proposed library location?
Bohn: Where it says City. That green spot.
Chmiel: Probably one of the highest pieces of property dollar wise.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 27
Horn: Any other questions or comments? It sounds to me like we've hit
most of the key areas.
Barry Warner: Does this type of diagram help you visualize things a little
bit?
Chmiel: Yeah.
Horn: It doesn't give us any answers yet.
Bohn: ...with that vacant property, that's really a large piece of
property there isn't it?
Ashworth: It basically could handle a, it could handle a fairly large
pro3ect on there today and have room on there for a second pro3ect in the
future.
Chmiel: I'm really trying to determine what the basic needs of that area
is. It's hard I think right now yet to determine. If it were a office
complex of some type which wouldn't necessitate a lot of people coming in
to the buildings other than those working. $o it does not create a lot of
problems as far as access to and from.
Robbins: I think you have to be cognizant though of those tracks too
because I worked in the building that's in the blue for a couple of years
and I'll tell you, there are trains that go by every day and I'm not sure
how much of a, personally I would not want to have tracks back of me living
there and have tracks back of me 50 feet and the trains running by there
every day.
Chmiel: What's the frequency of trains going through?
Robbins: We were counting 7 or $ a day. That was during the day. There
were more at night.
Horn: You were in the white weren't you?
Robbins: I was in the blue property. The white space, yeah. Right there.
And it's extremely noisy.
Bohn: Yeah, but where the yellow is, that's higher ground. That track is
below.
Robbins: Yeah, I'm saying generally who's going to want, I mean in general
do you really want to live with a train back of you 50 feet?
Horn: A busy train behind you and a busy street in front of you.
Gerhardt: You have to remember that you're also...
Chmiel: That's the place for it right there.
Horn: Any other questions?
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 28
Barry Warner: Thank you for your time.
Horn: Thank you. It looks good. We'll move on to the painful process of
paying the bills.
APPROVAL OF BILLS:
ChmieI moved, Bohn seconded to approve the HRA Accounts PayabIe of ApriI
and May, 1991 as presented. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried.
Gerhardt: Chairman Horn?
Horn: Yes.
Gerhardt: I caught Bernie in the hallway and sort of updated him on what
happened on item 2. I asked him to come in to discuss item 2 if he wanted.
He was acceptable... Did you want to say anything Bernie?
Bernie Hanson: Well I talked with Brad a little bit inbetween here. I
guess I've been brought up to date. I apologize for not... I think the
things that are happening on the side of Market Square, we've just got to
buy a little more time. I guess that's about the only way I can look at
it. As I said earlier, if Market Square happened...some directions taken
that it looked like it was going to become reality. I don't know what the
hell else could fall apart now.
Horn: I think one of the frustrations we've always had is that we sit here
and we've always felt we were in a position where we couldn't do much but
sit and watch. Maybe we figured out a way to be in a position to do
something.
Bernie Hanson: I don't know how many more things are going to be looked
for before it can happen.
Horn: I think we all share that frustration.
Bernie Hanson: I was told there were some deadlines...and we've got some
direction of things that will have to take place so it's just a matter of
waiting it out.
Bohn: The next meeting is in what, 2 weeks?
Chmiel: 2 weeks from now is when we're going to have a meeting Bernie.
That's either going to be a yes or no.
Robbin: Do you plan on making an announcement or anything in case anything
changes?
Gerhardt: There will be a definite notice sent out.
Bohn: Is that June 8th?
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting
May 23, 1991 - Page 29
Bernie Hanson: I was just going to say, where 'does that 2 weeks take us?
Gerhardt: Yeah, June 8th you have a joint Council/HRA and Planning
Commission tour. That's the bus tour.
Bohn: Do we meet here?
Gerhardt: We'll be meeting here at City Hall and making several trips up
and down TH 5 and making stops.
Bohn: Is this a breakfast meeting?
Chmiel: Coffee and rolls are going to be available and the bus is going to
leave at 9:00. At least that's what I read.
Horn: It doesn't say anything about the bus but it does say there will be
coffee and rolls at 8:00. And the session starts at 9:00.
Gerhardt: The main aspect of that was to tour up and down TH S and get a
feel for the area... Right now there's Barton Aschman showing drawings of
what is in the eastern part of the downtown...and you can take that all the
way through TH 5... You can really develop a corridor study...
Chmiel moved, Horn seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and
the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Submitted by Don Ashworth
Executive Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim