The URL can be used to link to this page

1990 07 25CHANHA$SEN HOUSING AND REDEVEL~NT AUTHORITY REGULAR MEETING JULY 25, 1990 Chairman Horn called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Clark Horn, Jim Bohn, Don Chmiel and Tom Workman MEMBERS ABSENT: Charlie Robbtns STAFF PRE~ENT: Don Ashworth, Executive Director; Todd Gerhardt, Asst. Executive Director; and Paul Krauss, Planning Director P~PROVA~ OF,M~NUTES: Workman moved, Chmtel seconded to approve the Minutes of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting dated June 21, 1990 as presented. AIl voted in favor and the motion carried. VISITQR_ PRESENTATIONS: Gerhardt: Tonight Beverly Miller from Southwest Metro Transit is here to make a request of the HRA regarding the moving of the bus shelter as it sits on Market Blvd. now. I told Beverly I'd help her out a little bit on this one. This is a plan that Beverly had submitted to staff approximately 2 days ago showing the relocation of the bus shelter which sits approximately right here'on Market Blvd.. They're proposing moving the bus shelter over into this location which on the north side of the railroad tracks, south of what we call Bowling Alley Road. Part of Beverly's request of the HRA, she is looking for the HRA to donate these lands to Southwest Metro and that they make the public improvements in that area. Staff would recommend that you direct staff and enter into a verbal agreement with Southwest Metro if you consider this proposal tonight. Horn: What's the purpose for moving it? Gerhardt: Really it's two fold. One, the Market Square development has requested that the shelter be moved and two, the HRA had directed staff to look at adding turn lanes in this area on the ~est side on Market so that you could puli a bus off...traffic. By doing this we're saving substantial money in an intrastructure in making that curb cut and also by a nice buffer area of what would be the building here, and...sign and the activity that's occurring on the back side of the Dinner Theatre. Horn: How does this area affect what we were reviewing Monday evening? Is this away from that area? Gerhardt: Yes. Horn: Will it be consistent? Will it be something to tie up the others? Will these look like two little landscaped blobs? Gerhardt: Right now we would work closely with the same type of theme where it would come up with and what would be the Market 81vd. and TH 5 upgrade. Same plant material that would be in that area would be in here. Of course your bus shelter has already been completed and designed as it sits out there. Physically moved from this site over to here and set on a concrete pad. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 2 Horn: Any questions? Chmiel: Yeah, I 'ye got just one question. Relocation of that bus shelter. We will put it in a position that there will be sufficient room for other vehicles to go around that? In other words, having it set back in closer to the shelter so there's enough room for cars to pass by so it's not obstructing. Horn: The bus will go off the roadway. Chmiel: Yeah. Where are you showing it? Gerhardt: The bus shelter would sit here. Krauss: This lane here, this would be exclusively for buses. Chmiel: Great. That's fantastic. Krauss: Beverly talked about wanting to have that lane wide enough so if a bus breaks down, one could get around the other one. Gerhardt: Would you like to say a few words about your proposal and if you want to add anything that I haven't said. Beverly Miller: Basically Southwest Metro now currently owns the easement where the bus shelter sits and we'd like to work with the developer in order to assign that easement agreement to them but we want to make sure that we have a location and we've got probably 20 cars that park over there now on a daily basis. Essentially by moving the shelter over here we think that it will be easy for the passengers to park here along this area and maybe even up here...as well as this will be the street...don't think there will be a lot of traffic here that we'll interfere with. We had a bus up here the other day and we think that just move it a little to facilitate the bus traffic as well...and then come back to Market and either go out to TH 5 or can take 79th and go down to...so I think it gives us a number of options to work with as well. One of the things that we find happening in downtown Chanhassen is that we are originating buses at this location as well. Particularly express buses that have limited stops so there will be some buses that come here and go...so we'd certainly be willing to work with whatever the downtown landscape scheme is and make it an attractive Horn: Do people bring the bus out here to work in Chan? Beverly Miller: No. There's not a lot of incommute from other areas in here. But I was talking today with a gentleman that's working with McGlynn and we're going a demonstration program... Horn: The thought being if we're going to move it, maybe we should move it into the industrial park. Beverly Miller: Well usually the service with an industrial park is Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 3 another service to us and we're not at a ices to build more shelters. Chmiel: I don't know what the availability of parking spaces are within the industrial park too. Horn: That would only be for people coming out. Chmiel: Right. I realize that. Horn: Unless you just have a separate loop that you're running down there and then this is where you pick people up. Chmiel: The accessibility here I think would be better, for the residences and the community. I like it moving off of that because that's going to become heavily traveled street. No question. Krauss: There's also an ability to cross utilize the spaces here. If it were an industrial park, you'd really have to double up on the stalls because people need the industrial park stalls from 9:00 to S:OO and that's when they're parking here for the buses as well. Some of the plans for rahab of that area include maybe a movie theater or something of that nature that would peak in the evening. In that case, you could use these stalls during the day for the bus and the same stalls again in the evening for whatever happens there and kill two birds with one stone. Beverly Miller: compete... That's a great joint use and that's why...so we don't' Serhardt: But realize that with those uses, the bowling alley, if it should ever have to change, does not lend itself to a real commercial/ retail use because the stalls will be taken up so basically by going with this, we'd almost eliminate any potential of the bowling alley coming into a real retail use be it similar to Retail West. Chmiel: How do you publicize or notify your riders of the location changes? Beverly Miller: The first thing we do is put the flyer up on the bus... for all the riders. The second... Workman: They're not going to be moving their parking too far away from here though. Horn: No, you can still see it. Workman: My concern is one about the traffic. I've always been concerned about the traffic on Market Blvd. and certainly in the future when it becomes more of an entry into the City but if buses are going to be coming out of here and taking a left or coming down south and taking a left into there, what kind of a traffic situation is that going to cause with them coming in and out, entering on and off? Right now they're on and so they kind of still have a right of way there but now theY're going to be trying to get on and off. I don't know, maybe that's not a real serious problem but they're definitely going to be... It would be very appropriate if it Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 4 was over on the other side. If I understand your flow coming down from the north and if it was on the other side of the west side of the road, then they would just have a right in and a right out. Now they've got a left in and a left out sort of don't they? Beverly Miller: No, we come in from TH 5. Then we take the service off of 78th and we come in TH 5 as well .... it would miss people who want to walk out onto 78th. On the other hand. Workman: Aren't all the buses coming from the north now pretty much? Beverly Miller: Coming from Chan. Horn: On Market. They're coming from the north? Beverly Miller: 7$th. They come off of TH 5 and they come up Powers to West Workman: And then come down. Beverly Miller: And then come down. Workman: $o in that configuration they would be making a left in and then a left out? Beverly Miller: Unless we came in off of TH 5. Workman: I'm just talking currently the way it sits though. And we're not going to be able to get rid of the left out? Beverly Miller: No. Krauss: Tom, what happens with the buses is they leave at, what 6:45 or 7:00 in the morning and they come back, hitting the p.m. peak which is probably the only time you might have a conflict. With the p.m. peak though, if they come in on TH 5 then they would turn rioht so that wouldn't really conflict with too much. Now we share some of your same concerns with the traffic for the downtown streets and that's why we're doing that study so we'll have some better information with that. Workman: When it's going to be done? Krauss: Well, we met with them yesterday. Probably in the next 30 or 45 days. In that kind of a timeframe. Workman: Okay, then finally Todd and Paul, is the east side of this thing, of this loop, is it big enough to maybe take that old depot out there? That sits out there on Natural Green. Krauss: We tossed that around when we were meeting on this the other day. I don't know. It might be. It's something that, if you had a desire to, we could see if we could design it in. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 5 Workman: Wouldn't that make a nice, if it was rehabed, a nice monument entry, whatever there? Gerhardt: After our meeting on Monday night I talked to two architects from Benshoof and they said, you know if you're looking for another theme and an entry point, we do have a railroad depot that could be used as an entry monument into the downtown. Krauss: Oh, you mean the Barton-Aschmann group? Gerhardt: Yeah, and I told them how to get out to Natural Green to look at it. It doesn't give you a lot of vertical. Workman: I'm not talking about it taking over the skyline. I'm just talking about it being a very nice, potentially a nice bus shelter. Chmiel: You mean relocating it here? Workman: Yeah. I think it should be looked into as a permanent something or the other shelter combination historical piece of something. I don't mean to clutter up this spot and make it look tacky or anything obviously but if there's enough room here to build something of a grand shelter. Gerhardt: I think so. 8everly Miller: We wouldn't have any opposition to that. Gerhardt: ...Holiday is another potential spot. Market and TH 5. Workman: For the depot? Gerhardt: Yes. As a spot. Bohn: Ever think across down from the gazebo? Gerhardt: Yeah, Klingelhutz. Bohn: Across from Klingelhutz. Gerhardt: That's another spot. Workman: I'm just thinking it would and I don't have the dimensions in my head but it might make a good use for partially, we've got the eaves and overhangs and stuff where people could stand under. Maybe there could be a snack shop in there, I don't know. Beverly Miller: Could you use it? Bohn: ...vandalize the place. Workman: I'm talking about making it vandal proof. Slab of concrete and. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, i990 - Page 6 Beverly Miller: One of the things we've had requests for is people would like to bike to, we've kind of threw around a bike rack outside but I mean we'd be willing to work with you. With the track running behind it, it kind of ties in. People would probably think there's, the train stops there. Gerhardt: We could add that as Part of the purchase agreement caption of locating the depot. Workman: Is that our depot? Chmiel: Yeah. We own the land. Gerhardt: We don't own it yet. We're negotiating on it yet. Workman: The depot? Gerhardt: Yeah. · Workman: Well, just throwing out an idea. Chmiel: Just one other question that I have. I hope you address this with Gary. Are the turns wide enough.for the buses to get in and out without encroaching on the other side of the opposite lanes? Krauss: Yeah, it's a good question. We know they are. Beverly was out in a bus the morning before she came to meet with us to take the turns. The problem is, the radius' on some of those corners were insufficient. They can handle it right now when there's no traffic but it's not the situation you want to see. Those curbs down there are going to have to be opened up. I think it's a 30 degree radius now. We're looking at a 45 degree which will just round it, Long term though there may be some other improvements, For example, if we ever want the bus to run down 78th Street, the bus can't effectively make that turn because of the median from Market Blvd. onto 78th. It's possible that if a turn lane were put there at some point in the future, that that would fix that. But it is an issue. Beverly Miller: And we are encroaching... Gerhardt: But the way this is designed right now, if you come from TH 5 up Market into here and around here, we do not have to make any radius changes. Workman: Which corner are you talking about? Chmiel: I think you might find Market going in you may have a radius problem. Krauss: If we were to go with this, I think initially we'd probably want to open up both of these just so it's done and it's done right and can handle bus movements. What you'll find is...when a bus comes down here, they'll swing wide into this other lane to make that curve which is fine Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 7 right now. There's no traffic on it but you'll want to encourage that. Chmiel: That's another concern. Because always, especially if you're running into an elderly person who's driving that road and seeing that bus, that could cause a problem. Then also the right in, as you're coming in to make the circle. ! can see there's enough room for the left to get back out but that angle as you're approaching in for that U might be a little narrow too. Horn: That's not to scale is it? Gerhardt: No. Beverly Miller: We'd like this wider. Horn: The bus would get stuck in the circle if that were to scale. Bohn: It looks like with that drawing there's no though of the bus ever going out the other direction, out to the east. Because that road might eventual ly. Chmiel: Going all the way towards Holiday back in to TH Horn: No, that's not Holiday. 8chh: It's not even a road yet. Chmiel: You're right. Bohn: But eventually I hope there's a road there. Horn: Were the one Tom that suggested, did we look over at the other side of the street which would be next to the pond? Workman: Well I just thought that the way the buses were coming now, that would be perfect so it was a right-in/right-out rather than potentially a left-in and a left-out. Horn: Is that an option? Krauss: There's not enough room on that. On the south side of the tracks? Workman: It'd have to be the south side. Horn: No, Well, would it be the south side or would it be just. Workman: South side of the tracks by. Horn: And all the north? Krauss: Yeah. And when you come to the south, I don't think there's enough room between the pond and the... Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 8 Gerhardt: in there. Chmiel: Horn: Bohn: Horn: It drops off. I mean you'd have to. put a heck of a foundation Almost like a walkout. Some pilings. cover up Pat's pond. Plus it'd be further away from parking too. Yeah, it probably would be actually further from the people that use it the most. Gerhardt: And you don't want to cross people over railroad tracks. Those tracks are very active. I mean we looked at locating the little depot over in here on the pond and we were out there looking and a train went by and we said no way. I mean kids would han~ around there and kids would play around by the tracks. It just didn't feel good at all. I mean the ground just shook. Chmiel: How many trains do we have going through? Gerhardt: Six. Chmiel: Six. Gerhardt: Most of them are at night. Two early in the morning. One in the afternoon. Horn: Is this the only bus stop in town? Beverly Miller: Yes. Horn: My concern here is that we're actually moving it further away from the main part, for the people that want to use the bus from their houses that don't commute there. Workman: Maybe a block. Bohn: A long block. Chmiel: It's not much more than that is it? Gerhardt: Well it lends itself better right now... Horn: You can't get through by the hotel there can you? Gerhardt: ...sidewalk straight down. Now they have to take the sidewalk across the street and hit the sidewalk across the street that isn't a thru street and walk over. Horn: They probably come on the east side of Fiily's there. Between the Hardware and the building. That would be their shortcut. People coming from the main part of town. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 9 Gerhardt: Once the skyway is put in, you won't be able to drive thru underneath it. Horn: Walk. I'm talking about people that want to. Not everybody drives to the bus. Beverly Miller: That's true. There are people who live over by St. Hubert's, a couple people in fact that like to have the bus to walk out to instead of having to get in their car and drive down to the park and ride lot. And like I said, you know under this scenario, we aren't running as many miles in the city that people actually can access the bus. You ate drawing them into a common point. Gerhardt: If I'm coming from St. Hubert's, I'm going to stay on the sidewalk on the north side of West 78th Street until I come to the corner. Bohn: The closest way if you're coming from St. Hubert's would be coming crossing over by the gazebo and going down that back road. Krauss: That's not a real comfortable spot. Bohn: Lot shorter if people are in a hurry. Chmiel: Will that bus stop say on 78th Street as it goes to TH 101, if someone were to flag him down? Beverly Miller: Yes. Chmiel: Okay, so that would eliminate those people walking from that point to here. Beverly Miller: Right. 8ohn: It doesn't come down TH lO1 then? Beverly Miller: Right now it takes 79th to. Gerhardt: West 78th. Beverly Miller: No, when they make the 'stop and go onto 79th and then what's that north/south street? Krauss: Great Plains. Beverly Miller: Great Plains back to 78th out to TH lO1 up to Valley View and we would still continue that movement with service to the east side of Chan for those people that live there and want to walk out because there are several that don't want to have to drive down to the stop but we do allow some flag stops. Krauss: I think ideally at some point, and you're serving two different markets between park and ride and walk to the stop. Ideally at some point Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page lO you'd like a stop someplace by Medical Arts where you could pick up the apartments behind there and the medical's right there and shopping but right now it just doesn't seem feasible to think about doing everything on 7$th Street because you block the street with the bus. Beverly Miller: Right. We would like to be able to put service on 78th for those kind of reasons. Bohn: Put a bus stop where John Peter's got his lot with the cars and stuff there for sale. Horn: What are we looking to do tonight Todd? Gerhardt: Tonight you would be directing staff to draft a purchase agreement between the HRA and Southwest Metro and execute that agreement. Workman: Is that something that a public hearing may be need to be held on or open to? Gerhardt: It would have to have a public hearing on the land sale like we're having tonight and it would have to be advertised in the paper 10 days prior to the HRA meeting. Horn: $o our action couldn't be final until after the public hearing? Gerhardt: Right. So we could not execute that agreement but we could go ahead and draft it and bring it back for execution I would say. Horn: Well, that's one option I see. The other option would be if anybody would like further to look at this, we could come back with a report that we could digest. I'm a little uncomfortable with having a visitor presentation we need to act on in the same evening. That's typically not done. Gerhardt: Could we bring it back as like we're doing tonight as a public hearing but first give a staff presentation first regarding the agreement, go through that and then have a public hearing on the land sale? Horn: Is everybody comfortable with the concept? Chmiel: Yeah, I am. 8ohn: Yes. Wot kman: Yes. Beverly Miller: Southwest would also like an easement agreement to utilize the parking spaces up here as well. Currently...we don't have anything. Workman: A lot of things...railroads. That could be years. Krauss: No, this is all our property. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, i990 - Page 11 Workman: I guess I would like to emphasize before we, I don't think we have to vote on anything but emphasize that it would be, if we can use the depot, we're probably running out of places where we might be able to use that and it might rot into oblivion sometime soon. Horn: Is there further discussion on the depot concept? I know one time we talked about setting up some type of a historical site at the Square too which might be another option for the depot. ! like the concept of keeping it in here because you're keeping the same type of use for it. Bohn: I don't know if we can use that depot for a bus shelter though. People get inside that, it's not open. Workman: It could be opened though. Horn: We'd have to open it up. Workman: I think it could be opened. Bohn: You'd destroy the looks of it then wouldn't it? Workman: Well yeah. You'd have the super structure of the thing but it might have to be modified but it's going to go to the termites otherwise. Horn: I think what we need to do before we did that was to see if it could architecturally be used in this kind of area because we're really changing for more of a historical use to something that we've tried to blend in with the overall architecture of our redevelopment. I think somebody should tell us whether that can be done. Workman: It's got the same...I mean the points on it. It sort of matches that. Horn: What, do you want to make it look new? Workman: I think it will clean it up some. Horn: Or would you want it to be restored more to it's original state or to a new state? A new style? Workman: I guess I'd prefer the original as best as possible. Beverly Miller: Would you want Southwest to do that or would you do that? Gerhardt: I think that would be our responsibility to do that. You can't ask Southwest, I mean it's no benefit to them. What I would suggest, as a part of the purchase agreement so we have a document for our next meeting, that we have a condition in there that the HRA has the right to place the depot somewhere on that site and between now and our next meeting, we look at the potential and talk to both the architect for Southwest and our architects that are doing the TH 5 upgrade and look at a location for that depot. 8ut that the purchase agreement, give us the option to locate it there for the time being. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 12 Workman: Does the railroad own it? Who owns it? Gerhardt: Natural Green owns it. It was located down by the Big A Auto retail center there and then the Natural Green bought it for storage. Bohn: It might too be cheaper to build a replica of the depot than repair that one. Horn: My concern is that we don't lose it's historic significance. Gerhardt: I would suggest to remodel it similar to what we did with the old Village Hall. We kept the lap siding. Kept the inside, or redid the inside completely to bring it back to it's natural state than what it was before. Horn: So we'd keep that option open? Workman: Then when it's all done, turn it cockeyed. Horn: I would accept a motion to direct staff to prepare the necessary documents to enter in an agreement with Southwest Transit. Chmiel: So moved. Wot kman: Second. Chmiel moved, Workman seconded to direct staff to prepare the necessary document to enter into an agreement ~ith Southwest Metro Transit Commission regarding moving the bus shelter from it's present Market Boulevard location. ~11 voted in favor and the motion carried. Horn: I assume we're going to reserve the option for the shelter to put the depot there? Gerhardt: Right. That's what is in my motion that you made. Horn: And we'll conduct a public hearing. Will we conduct that or will City Council? Gerhardt: You will. You will own the land. It's in the HRA's name, not the City's. Horn: Yes we do have public hearings. Anything else on this subject or any other Visitor Presentations? Brad Johnson: I thought I'd give you a progress report and then we've got a couple of things we'd like to have you address and maybe Clayton, chime in if I'm not saying what we want to accomplish here. We have our financial commitment and I suppose theoretically we could start construction and close on the loan Rugust 1st. Real life is that we've got a myriad of things to work our way through in order to complete that some of which, let's say there's 30 different items that we have to complete. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 13 Some of which concern the City directly and then of course if we don't complete it, they all concern the City directly so I'll talk about those things that would concern the City directly and then some that are causing. We did not complete the formal approval of a PUD and development agreement at the City Council meeting on Monday simply because it wasn't ready to no fault of anybody except we had some negotiations that we have to complete. That requires a hearing by the City Council and in this particular case I believe the next City Council meeting is the 13th which is probably a little too late for us to accomplish a deadline of the 15th to have closed on this, which is what the deadline was set by the HRA and we just as soon keep it that way and keep moving along. So that particular development agreement has some issues that ! hope get worked out tomorrow morning. Some of which you're working out tonight and they had to deal with moving the buses. Whether we build currently the turn lanes, all of which came after the hearing that we had. In other words, these were things that came up after our final approval of the plan by the City because I think everybody wanted to study the bus issue. Certainly the buses are important and how we handle traffic on Market 81vd. is important but there were some expenses in there relating to that and so there are cost issues .... staff a couple of times and I believe they have a meeting tomorrow morning to see how we could proceed on that. Is that right Todd? A meeting between Gary Ehret and Oon is tomorrow morning. Gerhardt: It's at 8:00. Brad 3ohnson: It's important that that gets resolved because then that agreement can be drafted and presented to the Council. I'm Just bringing you that to your attention. Two of you are on the Council. ~4e've got to figure out how we're going to handle that but I think technically now we couldn't do anything until the 13th which is probably too late if we're going to hit a deadline so we should probably address maybe someway of increasing that speed if possible. It's not a public hearing document or anything? Gerhardt: No. We would consider those as change orders to either the parking lot, the north side parking lot or the parking lot for what would be the hotel Country Suites. Workman: Would we need a special meeting? Gar hat dt: No. Brad 3ohnson: Technically if you approve the development agreement, what happens? Krauss: The development agreement wasn't on the last agenda because there were some last minute negotiations that came up. You would need to act on the development agreement and that would take a special meeting if that deadline was going to be met. Workman: Brad, make clear for me the schedule. August 1st is what? Housing and RedeveIopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 14 Brad Johnson: Well technically, we could cIose probably on August 1st. Reality says probably not. We have 30 or 40 different items that we have to accomplish to get things done. If it looks like we can push the closing, we have a date that was set, and I think that's a permanent date. As of August 15th, if we have not closed, the assistance that you were going to give us to purchase two of the outlots and Bernie's lease come to an end. Horn: Right. Brad Johnson: That's an action that I think you guys took 2 or 3 meetings ago. So we don't might the urgencies. I mean good god we've been at this project for a year so anything that could encourage ail of us to move ahead but as we look down the line and those things that we have to accomplish, one thing we did not accomplish was getting the PUD agreement approved at the last City Council meeting which normally would not have been a problem except you don't have one for 3 weeks at this particular period of time. So I think at some time we'll know, once we've got the agreement when we're going to close and so we won't yell wolf until we have to yell wolf but we may have to request that if it gets done so we're comfortable with it. It may be that we'll close on the 15th but right now we think, in this business, like any business, we've got to shoot for a date and we're assuming that we're shooting for sometime between the let and the 6th. Our other problem is that the bank, in order to agree to a close or even start the closing process wants these agreements all in writing and approved. Now they have to sit down and look at them so it's Just the process we're going through and we'll keep you. You know we've slid about 2 weeks here for legitimate reasons and if we can get this meeting done tomorrow and get that agreement cranked out. It's sort of this particular agreement is a boiler plate agreement sort of for the City with some minor modifications so it's not a major thing. It's just some things that were added that were financially significant and haven't been taken care of. The second thing is the redevelopment agreement which is the agreement which the HRA signs. We have not received a new copy and we would request that, I guess pressure be put on the City Attorney who's handling that to get the blasted thing to us Todd. We have gone through four of these so far and we know that this is an area where things move slowly so we do not have our final redevelopment agreement. It's true that changes are happening to that. The last one was written in December. I don't think we've had an update and we've been requesting an update for a period of time and so we need that one. Horn: Why isn't that done? Gerhardt: The pressure's on. He's making the revisions. In the last 2 weeks we've made a variety of changes and I think the last one that we had told him about was on Monday so he's working on it. The pressure's on from staff. We've talked to him several times today and would expect an agreement by Friday is what he's telling me. Brad Johnson: Good. I'm Just saying, these are processes that we have to go through. I'm currently working with Bernie Hanson on a lease option type of an arrangement for him so that he can move over and own his spot in Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, i990 - Page 15 Market Square. We have not had a second sit down on, and ! don't think that this particular negotiation should involve the City at this point other than you should be aware of it's a fairly complicated deal because we have Bernie which legitimately has 'his concerns. We have the owner of the complex which will have their concerns and then we have a bank that we don't know. We're going to take down a construction loan first which will be for 2 years, which is normal. Then at the end of the second year, we have to make sure that a permanent lender, which would probably be an insurance company or somebody like that, will accept everything that we create. And so the banks will look at this as it has to be an acceptable transaction so that we can continue the financing. We're providing through this agreement somewhere between $300,000.00 and $320,000.00 of financing to Bernie and so we were acting as the lender at this point or the conduit for a lender. So we have not only a lease, and obviously we don't want the Lawn and Sports particular facility in this shopping center to stand out and be much different than you would think it would be. I mean what happens inside is going on is fine but the exterior and maintenance and what it looks like and we have to have under control so we are writing that agreement, shoot if Bernie brings it up, we've been hoping to meet with he and his attorney but we've made some modifications even as we read the agreement realizing that we hadn't quite solved the problem for both the bank and Bernie and ourselves but that agreement should be, and I think is in the hands of his attorney today and they should be able to react to that. So ! think we're trying to meet the deadline. We haven't seen all the requirements the lender is going to ask us but we know they're going to ask for the redevelopment agreement. The development agreements, you know those things that are vital to this whole thing. ! don't think there's any issues that can't be handled by staff at the present time. Clayton Johnson: The most important thing is that 3chh needs the development agreement. Since all the partners' attorneys and the lenders attorneys are all kind of on hold until we receive that and I'm not being critical of 3ohn because there have been changes that have happened continually but it's very important Todd that you get 3chh to deliver that as soon as possible. 'Brad Johnson: So that's where we are. Where we are on the leasing, as we're working our way through the leasing process, we're working through our final plans. The final plans and specifications have to be submitted to the City for approval before we start construction but we can still pull a permit. So realistically when people ask me when is this all going to happen, sometime during the month of August we should close but until we get certain agreements in our hands and see if we have any issues that we have to deal with, we can't say what date that would be. The bank was saying last week when they were here visiting, they thought August let was reality. We don't think that way just because we can see the paperwork we've got to get through and a couple of things that you guys have to agree to. Do you have any questions on that process? I mean it could actually happen in other words. Horn: Is your opening date of the building delaying day for day as a result of this or is this a construction season issue that buffers that? Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 16 Brad Johnson: I would say that if we can start in August, we plan on opening in March so I think that's still, August is the 30 days slot there and we think we can deliver a shell to people sometime in the month of Sanuary. Gerhardt: When will building plans be submitted? Brad Johnson: Normally they're submitted after we get the financing. We're turning them out right now and then there should be about what, a 7 day turn around period. And we can pull, I think the City, I think you or somebody on the staff said that we could do a grading permit probably because grading is about a 30 to 60 day problem on this. Krauss: After your development contract or your PUD contract is in and signed, it's 30. Brad 3ohnson: That's what Gary said. We can do the grading permit and then work on the plans. This is much like a lot of sites you have in town here is a major grading. I think it's a $500,000.00 site preparation program so it's a month or two just to get that accomplished. We've got quite a bit of soiI correction on the south side and we did get our environmental report back and there is nothing over there of danger so that's good. Workman: So that will start towards the end of August? Brad Johnson: Yeah. You'll see action over there and we have a ground breaking in August sometime. Towards the end. I think that will keep us on a deadline that we're trying. Ne all like deadlines and it creates urgencies so it's not good to change them until we have to but that's where we are. One of the issues then that I'd like to talk about a little bit today, I've asked Dr. Bonnet to come. He's the veterinarian that you've all heard about that has been waiting for a couple years to build a new veterinary clinic in town and came to me a long time ago about it. 3ust to refresh your memory, this does have a little bit of economic connection to what we're trying to do as far as the center but we have as part of our transaction, we've created a large outlot over here called Outlot A that will go to Bloomberg. That transaction will happen at the time we close on the loan. The City has agreed to assist us in the financing process because we told you we had too much land, we had to get rid of it and get some cash to lend or purchase this parcel and a parcel down here. Part of the redevelopment contract changes is that process, is that correct Todd? So we're working that part out. And then we'll probably repurchase all that so you're protected so you don't end up owning lots that... But the lot over here which is Or. 8onnet's, we have scheduled to sell to him at closing and part of the financial package that we have presented to tbs bank, is that that lot will be closed. One issue that comes up is that Dr. Bonnet's have gone up a little over the last couple of years. $10,000.00- $15,000.00 to construct this and he was ready to do it so he came to me and said is there anything we can do. I went to Don to see bow it could happen and if you recall, and you may not recall because I just learned is that the way the assessments are going to be levied on this project, the public improvement assessments, they're prorated across all the lots so each lot Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page i7 has it's own assessment. Then we as part of our development agreement can use your, what do you call it, the write down. Gerhardt: Special assessment reduction. Brad 3ohnson: Special assessment reduction program to take care of the assessments against the major center. Then as each other development is built, if the cleaner's is built, or if the veterinary clinic is built, then they would come in and request assessment write down which fails into a standard policy that has existed as long as I've been around in the downtown area and in the park and I think you're approving a purchase tonight that's part of that, is that's just a permitted thing within the district as long as it doesn't go out over 3 years. It's a 3 year program. What do you call it? Now, the next issue which probably is a policy issue is do the lots then in Market Square, which are not part of the original development, which would be Dr. Bonnet's, the guy that goes on Outlot 2 and Outlot A. Do they necessarily qualify then for, I think they qualify automatically through the development agreement for special assessment write down or write down of special assessments but do they qualify for the land write down programs that are now a part of that program or have been made, I believe it's part of the one you're doing tonight. Right, there's a land write down? As a standard procedure as long as they do not extend over 3 years. We don't know if you want to set that particular policy tonight but we would like to encourage you to say that that would be available for this particular lot because then we can consummate for sure the transaction with Or. Bonnet which again takes away some of the steps that we have to go through on out hurdles because the bank's assuming that we have closed this particular transaction out. Then I think the concern is, from staff would be that well you need to do that type of thing and we're just saying, at least on this specific lot, it would assist us. It doesn't cost, it will cost the City 2 years taxes to do that. Of course the building won't be built if we don't accomplish this so it won't pay the taxes in a timely manner anyway but I think that's what we'd like to request and I asked Dr. Bonnet to be here because he is actually going to be the builder and we're not building it for him. Maybe you had something to say. Okay. Dr. Bonnet has developed how many clinics so far? Four veterinary clinics and he's considered to the guru of veterinary clinic development in the metropolitan area. They're all very well located and he's very well respected within the industry as a veterinary clinic developer and start. He'll build it, start it and later probably 2, 3, 4 years later sell it to a young veterinarian and he will come in and take over. He's done that in 4 cases and to a friend of mine in one case which I didn't know until I went fishing with him. $o that would be our request. Todd, do you want to, did I state that correctly? Gerhardt: That was correct. Brad 3ohnson: The reason we're asking for it at this present time, we're not going to ask that you do it tonight. I'm Just asking will you consider that and then we would go ahead and consummate our deal with Dr. Bonnet. Horn: We would need a staff report, update on that. We're not prepared to act on that this evening. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 18 , Brad Johnson: We know that. We can't do that until we actually come in with a development contract for that particular project. All I want to know is it excluded or not excluded is the question in your mind. Horn: We can't exclude it or include it until we have a report. Brad Johnson: Can you tell us how you feel? I'm just trying to get Dr. Bonnet some... Chmiel: Basically under Visitor's Presentation you can't make a decision at that time. Brad 3ohnson: Okay. $o that would be your answer? They can't make a decision. Horn: We need an update on this. We need more facts than that. We need to know what the precedent is. Typically what happens on these. These things would be put on the agenda. There'd be a staff report prepared that we would go through and review that we could evaluate it before the meeting. We don't make policy decisions on Visitor Presentations items as they come before a meeting. Is there a reason this couldn't have been on the agenda? Gerhardt: Brad and I did discuss it but he did not ask me to put it on the agenda. What I basically told Brad at that time is that, the overall development has seen substantial HRA assistance and one, it's located on a piece of property that the HRA already has provided $200,000.00 worth of subsidy in land write down securing the Burdick property. Two, the development contract as Brad stated right now, has the clause in there that the outlots would only receive specials written down. Nothing including itself to land write down and that the overall development has seen that already. Basically that's about it. If the HRA wants to provide assistance to the vet clinic, you are setting a precedence for what would occur on Outlot ~. There's no question that Bloomberg Companies would be in asking for land write down for the development that would occur on there. If you want to make an exclusion to just to do the vet clinic, you have that option also. Potentially where the cleaner's sits, that one could also come in. Basically what you are setting is a value on land within the downtown and you'll notice in tonight's packet that Opus has finally caught on to what our program is in the specials and land equally cover the cost so you are setting a precedence on land value within the downtown. Potentially could increase land values for all the businesses and a tax increase is another option, which isn't bad but can the businesses do that. Horn: Do you have any comments you want to make on that Tom? Workman: No. I'm not adverse or other so. Gerhardt: It presently would go $15,000.00 I think. $15,000.00 to $20,000.00 worth of specials that would go against this site? Brad 3ohnson: 12. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 19 Gerhardt: 127 And Dr. Bonnet would have the opportunity {o come in and have special assessment agreement with the HRA on the $12,000.00 for those specials to be written down. I mean he has to come in to me and say I want to enter into a special assessment agreement and be placed on the HRA agenda. It's not automatic. Horn: Don, do you have any further comments? Chmiel: Yeah. I guess I look at this as a cost of really doing business. You know the escalation of dollars. If you don't construct one year, your dollars go up. It's an automatic. Maybe we can look at even possibly splitting costs or whatever but it's really not the HRA's problem that the construction didn't take place when it was proposed to take place over the last 2 years. That's a developer's problem too to a point. Horn: Jim? Bohn: I agree with Don. I don't think it's really our problem. Horn: My feeling is that I want to be very careful that we don't set any new precedent with any deals that we make. I think we've been pretty straight forward and consistent in everything else we've down in the downtown and I want to make sure that we stay that way. Anything else? Any other Visitor Presentations? You're the only one left. Okay, the next item is a public hearing. Gerhardt: Clark, could the HRA modify the agenda to take action on number 3 before you take action on number 2? Just because if you go ahead with the public hearing on the land sale, you're basically approving the sale of land and then you really don't have an option on number 3. You basically have to approve that agreement. I'd rather have you decide that special assessment assistance should be given to Roberts Automatic and then approve a land sale. Horn: I guess one would ask why the agenda wasn't presented that way. Gerhardt: I guess I looked at it, you had to have the land sale before you could approve the private development contract. I mean I guess you could do it either way. I mean they should almost be done combined. So if you're in agreement with both of them, I guess you don't have to. Horn: I think we can hold the public hearing and then we can take both actions at the same time. Gerhardt: Yeah, I would suggest you do that then. PUBLIC HEARING: SALE OF LAND TO ROBERTS AUTOMATIC, LOT 3, BLOCK 2, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK. Horn: I would like to open the public hearing at this time for the land sale to Roberts Automatic, Lot 3, Block 2, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 20 Gerhardt: Included in your packet is a resolution authorizing the sale of land for the redevelopment of lands located on Lot 3, Block 2 of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park for the development of a 44,000 square foot office/ manufacturing facility for Roberts Automatic. Roberts is a precision milling company. They mill tools, washers, screws and a variety of different products. One of the people that they serve their product to is Rosemount so it is a nice location that those two can work together. The land sale is consistent with the HRA's special assessment reduction program for industrial properties. This project is similar to the Empak and Rosemount with the exception of Rosemount where we held a public hearing and sold bonds at the same time. Staff would recommend approval of the attached resolution authorizing the HRA to sell Lot 3 to Roberts Automatic for the fee of Horn: Is there anyone from the public who would like to comment on this issue? If not, I'd ask for a motion to close the public hearing. Norkman moved, Bohn seconded to close the public heating. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Horn: We're now in a position to take action on this and also the redevelopment contract. Why don't we get the staff presentation next on the redevelopment contract and go through that and then we can treat both of them at the same time. APPROVAL OF PRIVATE REDEVELOPHENT CONTRACT FOR ROBERTS AUTOMATIC PRODUCTS, INC. Gerhardt: Attached for the HRA's consideration is the private development contract between the HRA and Roberts Automatic. In this agreement the HRA has requested that Roberts Automatic enter into a minimum market value of their 44,000 square foot facility to be $1,760,000.00. From that would generate approximately $94,000.00 a year in taxes. Over a 3 year period of time that would add up to be $282,000.00 worth of assistance that could be used to Roberts Automatic in locating in Chanhassen. The specials and the land total $276,000.00 against Lot 3 with the land at $171,000.00 and specials at $105,000.00. Under this agreement basically you would be capable of writing down specials and land for this facility the remaining increment of $6,000.00. Staff would recommend approval of the private development contract and it's execution. Horn: Are there any comments from the commissioners? Workman: I have none. Hot n: Do n? Chmiel: I guess I was just looking at the map, Attachment 1. That being located to the north of Lake Drive? Gerhardt: That's Correct. East of the Empak site. West of the church. Chmiel: Right. And also south of the railroad? Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 21 Gerhardt: That's correct. Chmiel: Okay. Horn: Any other questions Don? Chmiel: No. I guess I went through the contract, redevelopment and the only thing I was primarily concerned with, I thought I had read in there was the basic hold harmless clause for the City and I'm hopeful it's in there. If it isn't, I'd like to be sure that it is. Gerhardt: I've got that written down to check. Horn: Are you going to verify that? Gerhardt: Yes. Horn: Anything else? Chmiel: No, that's it. Horn: Jim. Bohn: I don't have anything. Horn: It looks like a good addition to the park. I have no. Chmiel: Good addition for Rosemount having them this close. Good addition for Roberts Automatic too. Not so much transportation. I like that environmental decision. Horn: Okay. If there's no further discussion, I would accept a motion on the resolution authorizing the land sale first. Workman: So moved. 8ohn: Second. Workman moved, Bohn seconded to approve the Resolution authorizing the HRA to sell Lot 3, Block 2, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Second Addition to Roberts Automatic Corporation for the development of a 44,000 square foot office/manufacturing facility. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Horn: Next item is to approve the private redevelopment agreement. Further comments on that? If not, I'll accept a motion to approve. Workman: So moved. 8ohn: Second. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 22 Workman moved, Bohn seconded that the HRA approve the P~ivate Redevelopment Agreement with Roberts Automatic Corporation and thet~ development of a 44,000 square foot office/manufacturing facility. Al! voted in favo~ and the motion carried unanimously. UPDATE REGARDING THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE HRNUS BUILDINO ANO GARY BROWN'S CAR WASH, WEST 79TH STREET. Gerhardt: The HRA at your last meeting directed Lotus Realty to take their concept plan to the Planning Commission for their review of Brad's proposal. That meeting was held on July 18th. I was unable to attend that meeting but we do have two Planning Commission members here this evening and Paul Krauss, our City Planner. I would let Paul finish up with the comments that were received at that meeting and the discussion that took part. Krauss: If I could give you a synopsis of what my report was and I can try to fill in what the Planning Commission's feeling was and they can describe it themselves since we have 2 of them here tonight. As you're aware, we've been working with Brad for some time on this and it finally reached the point where he had retained architectural assistance. The plans were coming together and we thought that they were to a point where they would stand for concept review under PUD. At least let the Planning Commission know and City Council take a crack at it .... Hardee's at the corner, a car wash, the Hanus building is an auto service center and two retail buildings. Staff was very supportive of this coming in as a PUD. We think it was imperative to do that. With this mix of uses, this tight a site, coordinating ability to coordinate access was very important to do it that way. In terms of the mix of uses, arguably fast food type of outlets always cause eyebrows to go up. Traffic is always an issue with them. If you're going to have a fast food establishment, you're probably going to want to have it on the highway however but you've got to balance that with the fact that this is a major entrance into the community and you have a lot of streetscape and view issues as a major entrance as well. Access and traffic have been one of our critical concerns on this and I have to point out too that, as I indicated before the meeting started, we've been working with Stagar, Roscoe on a downtown study and we've asked them to especially study this and to escalate their timeframe in studying this. The reason the Stagar report is taking so long is frankly we didn't give them the go ahead to start working right away after we got the go ahead from the HRA to finance it. At that time Target was still on again, off again and we waited to see which way to go so they have been banging away on this for the last 40 days or so and are coming together. $o I'll touch on briefly on what they're telling us now and what the issues are. The original proposal was for this to be a private drive serving the site. In discussions with the City Engineer, he and I both would strongly support this being a public street. Albeit one where it would vary standards because we just can't fit a normal right-of-way in here. But we think it's very important to be a public street for precedent reasons that we don't want a private street springing up elsewhere in town. Plowing is always an issue on these kinds of things. Street maintenance. Also you may want to extend the street at some point in the future to serve whatever happens on Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 23 Red-E-Mix, assuming Red-E-Mix is acquired. The roadway entrance to Great Plains Blvd. is a real issue and I discussed a little bit with Brad tonight what we found. We were out there yesterday, Gary and I with the consultants. We don't have the final data yet but we became very concerned with two things. One was an error on my part where the existing street section comes in over here...tracks and through an oversight on my part, I guess I didn't put 2 and 2 together and realize that that's shifting up close to the tracks and we have a real concern with conflicts with t~rns and if you're heading south on Great Plains and you want to turn left into the site, we don't want you sitting on the tracks waiting to get an opening to do it. We're going to get some more information from the consultants to see what kind of a stack we're going to confront. We had them talking to Hardee's to get their information but we were becoming concerned that that design may not work and that we may actually have to route the road to the south. It's premature to tell you we'll have to do that but it's been a concern of ours all along. There is, we haven't played this one through but there is an opportunity, of course this is wrong. The Amoco entrance here is wrong...single curb cut here now. There may be an advantage to having the road come in on that side and move back around here. Horn: Run that by one more time. Krauss: Well Clark, if you come in here where Gary Brown's car wash is right now, and come behind the Hardee's and then loop the road back to this alignment, what that does is it gives you sort of an offset here and you've got enough room to put in turn lanes. Again, I don't want to say that we have to. The Planning Commission didn't see that because we met with them yesterday. We know the concerns of the Planning Commission. We've always felt the traffic here as such is really going to be the regulating variable. If traffic works, we have a lot of latitude to play'with the site. If traffic doesn't, we would recommend that you crank the development back until traffic does. Internal circulation and parking has been real difficult to work out because the site's so tight. We just don't have a whole lot of room. We have some more issues to work out and there are some of the turning movements are sort of clunky. There's too much access to this private street or public road and some of the parking is inadequate based upon our ordinance requirements. Now we've asked Hardee's to give us operational data. We want to be fair under the PUD. We have some latitude to do that but right now there's not enough parking around the Hardee's and parking on this site is a little bit in some of the wrong places. Architecture. We think it's real important as we stressed all along that architecturally this thing has to be tied together and represent Chanhassen's central business district. Thus far that hasn't been shown to us. They're working with a pretty good architectural firm and basically our report here is a list of issues. We're saying, okay. Here's a concept. We buy the concept but before this concept becomes a reality that we could support, here's 15 items you need to resolve. Architectural theme, a unified architectural theme is one of those issues for us. Again, they really didn't take a crack at it yet because it was a concept and it was one of the concerns the Planning Commission had that they didn't have an opportunity to review that but we are raising that as an issue and continue to do so. The landscaping concept plan that's been developed is pretty meager. The overriding issue with this site is it's so darn tight Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 24 and the hard surface coverage is extremely high. There's a lot packed into this thing and there's not a lot of room to give. There's a row of trees shown on the north side of the road along the railroad tracks. The reality of that thing is the strip is only 5 feet wide I believe and 5 feet wide, you know you can't plant there. Either public or private, you're going to be piling snow up in there and it's going to kill what's ever there. HopefuiIy to resoive the issues that we've raised here, there's going to be some decrease in intensity of development to give us a ItttIe more freedom to do some good Iandscaping and image improvement for the site. Again, signage and iighting. Ne think that has to be a unified theme. You know there's aIways that trade-off for the PUD and again we're confident that working with a good architect we can get that but the concept doesn't demonstrate that yet because the pians are not that weIi developed. Drainage is also a concern and they have not looked into that. They need to retain some professional heIp. This pian works if everything can get dumped onto the raiIroad tracks or into the storm sewers that are avaiiable. We're uncomfortabie with that, the City Engineer and ! untii we get some information. We're going to remain uncomfortable. If any on-site ponding here is required, I mean it's pretty apparent that there's no place to put it. Something would have to give so that's something that needs to be explored. Timing of development is one of my issues and that's something that Brad and I have discussed. We've been out at this site and it is my opinion that if the City's going to work with the developer on this, that the site has really got to come around in one fell swoop. You know you don't want to wait for 2 to 3 years with trucks and boats and whatever else is out there to be cleaned up. If it's going to be opened up, you're going to get the view from TH 5. You're going to want it to be representative of the quality of development. Finally, platting and utilities need to be resolved as well. We went to the Planning Commission recommending that the concept be reviewed because we think it has merit. It's not there. It's not perfect. It has a lot of issues being raised but we think it's valid to pursue it as a PUD and we think that this gives direction to what we, as staff, would expect to see before anything came back for formal review. Now the Planning Commission frankly had some real serious reservations about this and ultimately recommended on a 4 to 2 vote with I abstention to recommend denial of the concept. They discussed a lot of concerns. In principle, and they can speak for themselves in a minute but in principle it seemed that the idea of this being a PUD was one that most of them accepted. I mean just as a zoning concept. What raised issues for some of the commissioners was the fact that there's a fast food establishment at the entrance into the CBD symbolize what you want to see at the entrance to the CBD. The density and intensity of the development was extraordinarily high here and the quality that we had laid down as conditions for bringing this thing back just wasn't apparent and the Planning Commissioners had very serious reservations about that. Now possibly this is a good time for Tim and Jim to explain what their votes were on the issue and some more issues that they raised but again, the Planning Commission has very serious reservations about it. Horn: Do you think the proposal was ready to the go to the Planning Commission when it did or are we suffering from the fact that things may not have been ready? Is this a typical state when we see things? Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 25 Krauss: For concept? Well, I'd have to say that the architect, in working on this, took somewhat of a minimalist approach. [ mean the ordinance says what you need to supply for a development concept and that's what he supplied. I've been raising concerns about architectural themes and landscaping and drainage issues from the get go on this. Now technically those do not have to be supplied to meet the ordinance. I wish they had been because I think it would have answered a lot of questions. Brad Johnson: The answer to that CIark, it was our opinion that we met every requirement. This ts the most detailed thing we've ever done on a concept pIan and this is the second time in the history of the city that someone has proposed a PUD concept. The first one was Market Square and it was in very much about the same level of detail. We had no elevations so it was a surprise to us because this is strictly a concept. There's no requirement in the ordinance to bring elevations and so forth. There's no requirement to bring in engineering so we didn't and that would be the next step. The difference is, this is a $5,000.00 problem and the next problem is a $10,000.00 more problem and that's why they've always had this so that a developer didn't have to spend a fortune up front just seeing £f you would agree so we thought we were prepared. Maybe not. I agree that...had we come with the whole architectural thing, we might have been accepted or we might have been blown away and if we'd been blown away, we'd have lost another $5,000.00 or $10,000.00 so that's kind of where we're at. As a developer, we tend to try to be, to do these as inexpensively as possible because it costs a lot of money. These are exactly what I've been presenting to you...and I've not had any real negative comments as to what would it look like. We tried to include far better version than we had originally 6 months ago .... we felt that we had a fairly positive report from the Planning Department and got totalIy shot down at the Planning Commission. Basically going away and... Horn: One of my concerns when I read through our staff report is that all we had was a staff report and we had no Minutes of the meeting. ! assumed they aren't typed yet so I'm really happy that you folks came to be w£th us tonight because we had a lot of questions. We'd like to get firsthand from you what your impressions were and tell us what happened. Wildermuth: ! think Paul's description of the commission's reaction was very accurate. Personally I, assuming that the traffic issue can be resolved and assuming that the architectural issues can be resolved, ! think the bottom line is that we feel the use is just too intense for that piece of property. There are just too many entities existing on the property. If somebody comes out of the car wash and the Hardee's, I think it would be a much better use for the property in the long run, 10 years from now I think that... The other concern that I had is that it is a PUD and I question what the City is getting f~om the PUD process other than developing that parcel of property and having something done with the Hanus building. Horn: Are you thinking in financial terms? Financial payback? In terms of what they're getting or what are you referring to? Wildermuth: Well amenities. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 26 Workman: Aesthetics? Wildermuth: Really a first rate from the standpoint of having no traffic, internal traffic problems .... for whatever uses are going to be there. In my view, I think the thing would work. I guess from a selfish standpoint I'd rather see an Applebee's than a Hardee's. It would be nice but even if Hardee's remains, I just don't see how we can cram a fast food operation and car wash and an automotive service operation and then another business in there. Horn: Did staff do any studies in terms of intensity comparisons between this and say other sites in the downtown or other sites in other communities? That seems like-a key issue that the Planning Commission would need an answer to. Relative to what is the intensity. Do you plan to do that? Krauss: Clark, it's something that we can sure follow up on. We can get hard surface calculations and that sort of thing. In terms of, we'll have information on the traffic in terms of what kind of a trip generation the whole thing is producing. Horn: When it comes to amenities and things, people tend to, they tend to become visual and an emotional kind of thing but maybe sometimes it's easier just to look at some hard facts and make a judgment. Krauss: In working with the Planning Commission I know I have some of the same feelings. I think a lot of what they're talking about is more subjective in terms of image. What's the image of this place going to be? Is it going to look like a parking lot with continuous movement jammed with buildings or is it going to look like a c~ality commercial project that entices one to come further into the CBD? That's something that really needs to be explored in terms of archit~tural work and landscaping work. Wildermuth: ...first class Edina type project in terms of architecture and visual because it is, you know it's got a very strategic location.. Horn: I think there are things you can do with the looks of things but if you've got something that's basically too intense to ever make it look good. Wildermuth: I think that's the key issue .... the traffic situation is probably... Horn: Tim, did you have some comments? Erhart: It's like we have these people meeting here, sometimes you have the same meeting but I think what I felt in the meeting. I don't think it was quite as negative as maybe Brad perceived it and maybe 3im at the other end saw it. I think the Planning Commission had a desire to develop property over what it is. I think universally the Planning Commission... thought this was an important site in the city in terms of you coming from TH 5. It really sets, it's one of those sites that sets the characte~ Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 27 of the town if you come through there. And so that was a big concern. I think everybody understood that due to the pecularities of this site that the way to approach it was going to have to be through a PUD process. That it's just too weird to try to effectively apply to a standard development ...so I think everybody was very much in favor of the PUD. However, when it came to the specific proposal that Brad made, I think the Planning Commission felt there wasn't, even though it met the requirements, there just wasn't enough information there to pass on a favorable opinion to the Council even though a couple of us did ultimately for it. I believe nobody was excited about it. 8ut on the other hand, I don't think any of us were totally against it either and I felt that the message that we left with you was well, sell us on it. Come back with some elevations and some architectural with encouragement to proceed but we really needed more data and more information. Wildermuth: Fix the density of it. Erhart: That was probably one of the, if there was a number one objection it was the intensity but you know, whenever you get a PUD, the concept of a pUO is that you're going to trade-off those things that would normally be a variance for something you get in return so that you can make the thing work and there was obviously a lot of things under normal development that require a variance. It wasn't clear from the data we had what we were getting in return in terms of the architectural. In terms of landscaping and so forth and so there just wasn't enough information to pass on a favorable. I think there isn't, you're going to have to weigh our desires to develop this thing today versus the bad things of, whatever plan you're going to come up with, there's going to be some bad things for that site. The other thing is, I think you've got to consider a personal opinion if you do develop it using the existing buildings which this proposal attempts to do. You further permanentize those buildings and the option to that is saying let's not do anything today. Apparently they're functional and Gary's going to use them for an auto center and leave it that way for 2 to 3, 4, 5, years until someone does come along and the land becomes valuable enough that somebody does come in with a real first class proposal that a few people mentioned. I don't think today you're going to get a first class proposal. I don't think you're going to get a first class proposal for 5 years unless this is a first class proposal and we haven't seen it but I just don't think you're going to get see that kind of thing for awhile but it may not be bad to wait either. I think until you get more information, it's going to be hard to weigh those things and so I guess I'd, in summary I felt personally...Planning Commission. Yeah, let's keep moving. Let's keep the process moving. We voted on it because we ended up discussing. I think we would have preferred to table it but 8tad preferred to see it voted on and that's why we voted on it negatively so I think that summary is the way I looked at it. Horn: 5 to 2 was the vote? Krauss: It was 4 to 2 with 1 abstention. Wildermuth: ...come back again. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 28 Erhart: Yeah. I don't think it was as negative as you're... Workman: When you're thinking Edina, what are you thinking of? Bonaventure? Brad Johnson: Can I speak to this? Horn: Let me find out if the commissioners have any other questions of the Planning Commission. Tom, do you have any further questions of them or Brad at this point? Workman: No, but Tim's last point on the permanency of that building there because that building really cuts off the whole thing kind of and really directs everything I think. Short of removing it or tearing it down, I don't know what could be done. It'd be nice if you could turn it. Krauss: It's definitely in the wrong place and I didn't envy the architect on this at all because what he was presented with is Hardee's got you know building MX-38 or whatever it is and that's what they've got to have here. And the Hanus building is here and Gary Brown needs so many bays in a car wash. Well, you know, there's only so much land on this site and once you give somebody all these marching orders, there's not a whole lot of latitude for them to do anything. Wildermuth: What I would like to see there is, you know I don't think a car wash has really got a place in that triangle. A car wash ought to be out in the industrial park somewhere. One of the entrance areas in the industrial park. Workman: It's the aesthetics of the entry to the city versus... Wildermuth: ...traffic issues in the wintertime there's going to be water...at the exit of the car wash... Workman: But it's also the high visibility from the highway retail sense too. Wildermuth: What I think the City ought to get from this is, for this parcel of land is a really Class A construction. Really Class A architecture. Workman: I like your Applebee's idea. Horn: Any other questions? Don? Chmiel: Yeah. The intensity of course is one of the problems within that area. I see that too there's a lot of traffic going to and fro within that particular area. I think we're concentrating two streets coming in to Chanhassen. That's two major thoroughfares. Great Plains Blvd. and Market Square. Those are the two areas that give the extension of saying Welcome to Chanhassen. I'm not sure what that, with the proposal with Hardee's, whether that's the best thing. Maybe it is, I don't know. But the traffic flow going through there. One of the things I think major companies look Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 29 for are the high traffic flow which would be basically TH 5. Look at it from the community aspect to the participation that they'll get or the people coming in. This is off a little bit from the beaten track. Great Plains Blvd. will no longer be TH 101. That's going to be diverted. I'm not sure whether are they aware of the fact that TH 101 will no longer be in that location? Wildermuth: They seem to be that way. Krauss: They're aware of the fact that I mean projections for TH 5 are 40,000 to 50,000 plus trips a day by the year 2000. That's a lot of hamburgers. Chmiel: You bet. And that's a lot of traffic congestion into that area. One of the questions I had is, what is their operational moats that they go through? How many cars do they get at what specific hours? Krauss: They're furnishing us that specific data so we're feeding it to the traffic consultant which I think is real useful for us to do but you've got to be careful on the other hand too because you never want to design a site for one specific tenant. I mean Hardee's I'm sure has excellent data' on their particular operational characteristics but if Hardee's moves out and 8urger King moves in, it might not work and so we want to have the best data but we want to take it with a grain of salt. Chmiel: I'm looking at it from the total congestion into that particular area. The use of the carwash, use of the Hanus building. What is the flows going in for those people? What are the different hours? Krauss: That will be in the traffic report. Chmiel: Okay. Because that can be a real problem and I can see that stacking problem in trying to get across that railroad to get into that area which could be a real problem with the road as it's exactly now adjacent to the railroad. I think two, the City should be getting something out of this by going with the PUD. It should be getting something from that piece of land as far as the City's concerned. The architectural theme has already been discussed. That's one of the concerns and I think everybody else probably has already hit on the balance of what some of the thoughts I had. Horn: Okay. Jim? Bohn: I was thinking of one more thing is the traffic coming in there, that road may be extended to Apple Valley Red-E-Mix and you'd have something else up there and you'd have just that much more traffic coming into there. That road, from what I understand it, may not be able to hook up to TH 101 at the other end and we're going to have more traffic in there. Krauss: Jim, you're correct. The latest design for TH 101 says that it's not safe to hook it up on that side so it would be basically a dead end street. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 30 Horn: Anything else? Bohn: No. Horn: I guess my primary concern is whether the piece works with those businesses in there. I can't really tell if it's too dense because I don't know what to compare it with. I have some real concerns about the ability to move traffic in and out of there. I like your concept of moving that road through south of Hardee's. ! don't know how they would react to that but it seems to me to make a lot of sense. One of the concerns I've had ail along is that we've only got one entrance into the Standard station. I think that's a potential for a real disaster having a situation like that for a service station. It seems to me that everything just is going to be a problem working in this area. In terms of the gateway concept, I guess I'd need to know what's going to happen with the elevation of TH 5. Is that going to stay the same? Is that going to go up or is that going to go down? Krauss: It's not changing over there. What is happening is they're going to be eating into that embankment that shields the Hanus building a little bit. That will be pushed back some but the level of the highway will be there because the intersection isn't changing much. Horn: You know, if you think of it as a gateway concept, and obviously you have to imagine that the Apple Valley is not there, you've got the Hanus building that exists today and you've got the new Standard station going in that are really going to serve as the primary sites that you see along TH 5. I guess I personally was a little surprised to hear that this might be looked at as a gateway area. I look at the gateway as where Apple Valley is and I look at tbs gateway over at the other side. This to me, unless you're going through a total tear down of what's in there is pretty much set. What you see now is pretty much what you're going to get and let's just spruce it up a little bit which from your report sounds feasible for the Hanus building which is going to be the major thing you see. The rest has got quite a high berm and is going to be covered up quite a bit by the new Standard. Krauss: Well the thinking though Clark is that that berm would be cut down so that. Horn: You're not going to lower the building. Krauss: No, but it's an embankment and you can slice it down so that, you know Hardee's fully expects to have dead on visibility from TH 5 and when you see how the grades work out, I think it's reasonable for them to do that... (There was a tape change at this point.) Chmiel: ...road access moving it to the south. Moving it in and around to come back into where that existing road is at on the back side of Hardee's. My question maybe to Paul is, would there still be the same total number of parking spaces or would some parking spaces be lost? Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 31 Krauss: You probably lose some because the road is bigger, longer and it's surface area has got to come from something. Chmiel: But then would Hardee's be amenable to that kind of a change? Brad Johnson: I don't know. I mean...doesn't change a lot but it could change a lot. They'd have to move back here. I don't know. We know what kind of traffic this generates. It's not a lot of traffic so that part we know. We just have to wait for the report. We're talking 500 cars per day into a shop like this. If it does 140~ volume. That's half the number of cars into the Amoco station. They're running around 1,000-1,200 so we have to just kind of wait for this traffic report. We're probably actually entering more traffic with those darn trucks coming out of the Hanus building than back in here because there are a lot of...that to me is not a real good deal. But let's just wait for it. I'm just saying, we're willing to come in and I've been showing this particular plan as you know everytime I come to a meeting, with a plan. We did not do the architectural engineering for the reasons we're going through right now. Now we're talking about changing the road. Let's throw the engineering away. I've got to have a site plan that everybody agrees upon in concept before we do architectural and engineering because I just know I'll end up throwing it away. We've got a $75,000.00 model out here that we did and I learned my lesson the first time around. You end up throwing a lot of it away. So we can come in with pretty pictures and say this is how it's going to look but it may not work. All I'm saying is let's deal if you want. I don't have any objections. I've got other ideas. I've always tried to sell 8town, taking away this car wash and let's take a section of %his building that's already there and accomplish that. Okay? 8ut that would mean that I'd have to come to the HRA and that's another change, a major change in the building that's not economical. Okay? And you guys Just have to tell me and that's why I think you guys have to hear. You've said, how much do you want to spend on the development of this beyond what is economically possible for somebody like yourselves. I mean we can do certain things and what we request and because of the PUD, this thing becomes financially unreasonable, then we simply will not do it. We'll just sell the land and move on. I mean that's what we'll have to do. 8ut right now I've got, and I have...long time and it hasn't honestly gone any near as fast as I thought it would go and we're hanging on to the whole deal. But we just need to know what the HRA. The Planning Commission has kind of said, what I heard them say is we want a nice place. That this is an entry level. immediate thing was what this guy said to me today. Well that's an entry level? Why did you approve the Amoco station the way it was? Why did you approve the Holiday? You had no choice. Okay? $o we're subjecting ourselves to a PUD and we know that we're going to have to answer your questions ultimately. We thought it was in Phase 2. I've got a very good crew of architects working on this project and they thought they could really change this around within budget this way. But we can change. We've got to get some concept so how important I think at this point is to the HRA and at, not at what cost but you know, we can generate taxes. More intensity, more taxes. The more taxes, the more TIF and shorter period of time we have to use it to accomplish our goal but I'm willing to do whatever I can. I've got uses. This is a use. I don't know. I work with everybody. I don't of anybody else who wants to come into town. We've Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 32 talked to Arby's. We've talked to Dairy Queen. Dairy Queen doesn't want to come near here because of the Amoco station. Doesn't like the looks ot: it. Okay, Hardee's doesn't mind being by an Amoco station. So ! mean you can talk to Dairy Queen. Dairy Queen turned this site down. Hardee's is bringing a much better building in and you won't take it. I show it to Arby's, they don't want it. They don't want to be in Chanhassen today. Those are your three basic guys that are kind in business. Horn: Wendy Brad Johnson: Wendy's is going out of business. Horn: That's too bad. They're the only good one around. Brad Johnson: Hardee's is growing so you've got to deal with that. Burger King is doing nothing. , Bohn: How is that going to affect, when the Red-E-Mix is gone, how is that going to affect your project? Brad Johnson: Well, see the other thing I had is Fred Hoisington at the direction of the HRA went last fall and did a study on this whole area and said this is what it should look like. This is what I brought to you and this is exactly what his plan was. What it is is a high visibility, destination office is what he recommended in his comprehensive study. Okay? Office is a very good use here. Traffic is not, like I said, it's a high visibility site but what could you ever sell there. You could sell of 1:ice. You can't sell convenience. Once you get beyond this particular building, there is not convenience to get back there. $o you build some nice office buildings. One or two buildings back in the corner. People come in...and leave at the end of the day. Horn: Tim, you had a question and then I'd like to hear from Paul what the feasibility is of if we don't do this and the thing goes just on what's approved today, what could possibly happen to it and so you think about that while Tim asks his question. Erhart: Okay. You've got a car wash today that works and pays taxes. You've got the Hanus building that works today and pays taxes. You don't have any traffic problems there today. The...go someplace else in town. You've got a good corner over in Market Square. Market Street. Siren that, what can you list for us, if I can ask, what are you, by this development, giving the City. List specifically. Brad Johnson: 1.5 million dollars in development... Erhart: Are you talking about taxes? Are we getting actual taxes? Brad Johnson: Right now the site pays $30,000.00 in taxes and we've increased it by $75,000.00. Erhart: Well, that's an HRA thing. From the Planning Commission, what are you giving us? Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 33 Brad Johnson: We've giving control over the design. Erhart: You're going to give us some architecture. We have no feel for what you're going to do architecturally. Brad Johnson: I just told you why we didn't do it. I mean I said visuaIly what you're seeing but I asked for the right to do that and you turned me down. You said we will not agree on the concept of this PUD using this so now I've got to go back and get a different site plan. As long as you review my site plan, I'm not going to do architecture or engineering because it costs a lot of money and you're not going to like that either. Each time I take that step, ! have to ask the tenant will you pay for it? Architecture, no. Nice look buildings cost money. The rents in Chanhassen don't justify that that high, high Edina kind of costs. We'd love to, maybe what we ought to do is tear down this building. I mean that's what they suggested at the Planning Commission. One person suggested to tear the building down. Well that's an HRA decision. I don't see that as a high priority in the HRA to tear down all this and start over again. It's only 10 years old. Workman: I suggested turning it. Brad Johnson: We could take a wing off. There's all kinds of things. It just costs money. You know if you said this was a high priority. What I heard from the Planning Commission was this is a high priority, make it look good. Okay? No problem. Then I have to go back to HRA and say well design something here. I know what the Tent structure is going to be here, what I can get out of this blasted place and the rest would have to come in an assistance package from you just like we've done in downtown. Now as far as intensity, this is just about the same density as the downtown business district which is a foot away. The downtown CBD starts right across the railroads so the intensity is the same as you have in the downtown area. Horn: Do you have any further questions? Paul, do you want to comment on that? Krauss: Clark, in terms of what it can be used for, it's highway business. Highway business includes some desirable and some not so desirable uses but it's the highway business district and that's sort of intentional. Horn: We've got one lot right that's really developable at this point. Krauss: There's one lot in there and you know, take it as a threat or as a promise or whatever in terms of what could go in there. It's a developable lot. It's got frontage on a public right-of-way but it's also pretty, it's got public right-of-way setback on the north side. It's got a public right-of-way setback on the south side. It's got hard surface coverage requirements. We beefed up the site plan ordinance last fall so if something does go there, will make it a quality project one way or the other. By foregoing this project at this time and Just leaving it status quo, I can't guarantee you that nothing will happen there for a period of time because of the ordinance. I mean clearly something could go there. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 34 I'm not as confident that it's as easy to put something there as Brad seems to feel but somebody can do it. Brad Johnson: The lot is 35,000 square feet. Gerhardt: Yeah, but you're still going to have to meet all the public improvements. ! mean to go through the regular process of upgrading the road and the traffic generated. Brad Johnson: It wouldn't change it. It's a public road. Krauss: I really don't believe the Hardee's would fit there. Brad Johnson: Oh no. I just thought something of about 5,000 square feet... Horn: Well as someone who sat on the City Council and had felt they had very little power to do anything about that standard station that came in down there, I'm somewhat sensitive to what he's telling us because you're pretty much locked in by your ordinance and the PUD is the only way that you get architectural control on that type of thing· Otherwise, whatever they say is what you get and you might think that you can have a lot of influence on what they do but if you get to court, you find out otherwise. Chmiel: It's an existing use and they're putting in the same use. Horn: That's right. Krauss: Oh clearly we could not stop them from doing it but we can and will expect whatever happens there to be a high quality project and that we have the authority to insist upon. Horn: 8ut you may not like the looks. Krauss: That's true· Horn: It could be high quality in somebody's viewpoint that will last for 300 years but you might not like the way it looks. Krauss: And that's where the PUD gives you the latitude. I mean right now Hardee's could come in with a quality brick building with an orange roof and we can say well that's a nice building but it doesn't belong here and under the PUD you may be able to manipulate that. Under site plan review, no. There's not a whole lot you can do about it. Horn: I guess from a perspective of what do we get, it looks to me like we get more control over what goes on. Obviously we can't overlook the financial side of the thing and I've obviously got a lot of reservations about it too but I think it could look better than what we've got down there today because we can spruce up the Hanus building as a result of doing this. We don't have any control over that today. If we don't do something here, that'~ going to sit just the way it is right now with the fence falling over and everything else. Any other questions? Housing and RedeveIopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 35 Brad Johnson: I guess the direction I need is what kind of assistance can we, you know. I can cut down by you guys think this is a priority item, which I heard the Council today say. We can cut down the intensity. Hardee's, you've got to have a tenant or we're not going to screw around with this at ali. Hardee's is not asking for any public assistance and probably would design the building in such a way that you'd be happy. That's what I hear from them. Okay? But beyond ail that, because they've done that stuff if they like the site and this is a good mite for them as it turns out. We'd like to cut back the size of this particular car wash but that's the requirement that Brown put on us because if we're going to relocate his one here, he wants a bigger one. I mean that's just life. Chmiel: Are you dealing with...on this one? Brad 3ohnson: Who? Chmiel: Hardee's. Brad 3ohnson: No. These are the guys out of Alexandria. They own one in Brooklyn Park. They own 4 in town here. And they've got one up north that they said they'd show us that's in Brooklyn Pa~k. One that's a different architecture and stuff like that. They have some flexibility. I mean they're listening to what you say with flexibility. Their problem is every time they go in and they say if you're McDonald's or something, everybody says ah, fast food. $o it changes. They're always kind of fighting that change because if they don't start fighting right away, they'll end up with something that doesn't even look like a Hardee's and that's the problem. Horn: Not for us. Brad Johnson: But it's a problem for them. It is a problem for you because you don't want somebody to come into town and fail commercially and that have done studies that show if you change the building, change these things, the business fails and they're willing to pay a lot of money for the land. Chmiel: What's their seating capacity in there? Brad 3ohnson: I can't remember. It's like 40. 50. Clayton Johnson: Have you ever seen the Hardee's in Redwing that Carol Bloomberg did? Brad Johnson: Hardee's has done the best job of trying to mix aesthetics. Chmiel: An old railroad building. Horn: Yeah, would they like a depot? Brad Johnson: Here's what I'd like to do but it's your money so you've got to deal with it. You're dealing here with they've got a policy. If you said that this was as important as the downtown, which these guys are saying this is the gateway. We've come back with a proposal and tried to Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 36 work out the numbers to upgrade it, cut down on, maybe we cut this building in half and there'd never be a car wash you know... I almost got 8town talked into that last week. Because if you go out, there's a car wash in, I don't like the building but it's out in 8urnsviile where you drive in and you have bays that's all heated all winter long and you wash your car, do whatever you want to your car and then drive it out. They charge you while you're in and it's a very efficient business but it takes a big building to do it. Okay, now I figured it out, the cost of building this building here is much more than just coming in here and rehabing this· I mean given that we have some kind of package. Workman: Which one's the car wash Brad? The one to the west? 8red Johnson: Right. Horn: Yeah, that other one's already there. Brad Johnson: You have it where you drive in and they're heated all winter long. You work on your car. Krauss: And you pay by the time you're there· Brad Johnson: Sometimes you pay by the time or else they have a timer. It just depends upon what time of day it is and you can do detailing and stuff. It's not a bad idea. I prefer to use something like that. You know you go over to his and you're kicked out in the cold seconds after the time is up. So we're just saying, how important is this? See what ! heard you guys saying, you said how important is this to the HRA and the HRA's objective to me was, which is the first time they've done this, go to the Planning Commission first. Now that was probably a mistake· This is the first project that's taken a long time for us to get through anything. We always came here, did our plan and then dropped it on the HRA and City Council and it worked. Okay? This particular plan the direction was figure it all out with the Planning Commission. Well we're doing it that. Now you've got a confused developer because we haven't set a priority··. We haven't really set a priority on this site but everybody says it's a priority but we haven't set the kind of priority you put on the downtown so we were willing to assist in the package. Horn: Maybe we gave you the wrong direction but what we wanted was the same thing that they want and that's some specific details on what the transportation is going to be on that thing becau~ we're very concerned about that. Brad Johnson: This is the site plan. They want elevations. · Horn: Well I know but Paul comes up tonight with a new input on that. We want to get that nailed down so we're looking at, just like you do. 8red Johnson: .·.quite honestly the traffic site was supposed to be done when? Krauss: I think we had hoped to have it done by end of July or early July. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 37 Brad Johnson: Okay, and our submission was kind of scheduled to meet with that so... Horn: When do we get that by the way? Krauss: We're Iooking at I beIieve about 30 days. Again CIark, the reason for that was when you authorized us to enter into a contract, Gary and I held off for several months because Target was hot on the agenda at that point and we didn't want to unleash them until we knew what we were dealing with in terms of downtown. As soon as that settled down, we brought them on board and got them going. Brad Johnson: In our case the clock keeps ticking. Krauss: Of course this is one aspect of the larger study that they're doing. Horn: We should have had that even before the Amoco site was approved because [ think that's a huge mistake down there now the way it is. Brad Johnson: My real question is, how important is, and we'd like to come back. If you're willing to give us and say hey, we'll consider going beyond the 3 years assistance which is kind of the rules, I was working with Don, we were trying to make this go. Then I got some creativity available and as long as I've got tenants, we can do things on this site. We were trying to limit the amount of assistance that we had on this site. Horn: Okay, at this point I'd like to get some feelings from the commissioners up here as to what direction we should take. The new guy always gets it first. Let's start with Don. Chmiel: I think I already gave my basic feelings. Horn: No, but I think what we're looking for is.specific direction on should we tell the developer to give us something that's a little aesthetic? Is the HRA willing to support that? Should we tell him to forget the whole thing or should we tell him to refine this and come back to us with possibly a different street layout? Chmiel: Well my first opinion would be to forget the whole thing but I know how much Brad has put time into this. Brad 3ohnson: I think from the City point of view,'you're losing taxes and you lose control. Horn: Yeah, do you want to lose that money? Chmiel: Noi That's true. But then again, when you have to look at taxes and dollars coming in, you're always looking for, at least I am but I sometimes like my cake and eat it too you know. I want the aesthetics with it. Aesthetics to me are important because that is the opening part of coming into the city. Even though you say that we've got a station, the Holiday station on one side and an Amoco on the other, those were Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 38 existlng even before we dld this. The Amoco station had all the rights to rebuild an existing location because of the zoning regulations that we have. I still don't like Hardee's there because I feel it's going to make one real congestion and my own gut feeling is, as I feel it. Wot kman: Indigestion? Chmiel: Yeah. You'll probably find out driving on with it but that to me is one of the real major issues for that area. If you try to come out from Holiday to get on Great Plains going north, it's a hard task because of the turn lanes coming in, the traffic that's going south and the traffic that's coming off of TH 5 on the yield and at the time when Amoco is there, people trying to pull out as you're trying to pull off and that's a real congested area. You add a little bit more into it and having those cars coming down. More traffic flow and it's going to present a problem. I think that's what that study ts going to do. I want to ~ee what the study really is going to tell us. Brad Johnson: I think you've lost Hardee's at that point because the time going on, their particular interest in this site dwindles. Get hardt: Why? Brad 3ohnson: They can't sit around and wait. They've got to build on this site. They perceive that this is so political, they shouldn't be here. Horn: 30 days will knock them out? Brad 3ohnson: You've got to understand that Hardee's gives the guy a right to develop the site. If he doesn't move along on it, he loses the right to develop the site. Krauss: We're supposed to have a draft of this part of the traffic study by the end of next week. It's the entire study that's going to take the rest of the time. Brad Johnson: I think one thing you've got to realize is, let's put a city hat on, you've got probably the most valuable land on that' site in the city from a highway visibility point and it's just not the visibility. It's the Apple Valley site. It's all the way down and it's got to have an access and if the people decide to cut off the east access, then you talk about real problems and you're going to have that whole area as a park because nobody's going to, you're going to say well you can't build anything in there. What if a movie theater would fit nicely there and that kind of stuff but you have traffic problems there. Well you've got buildable almost 40,000 to 50,000 square feet in there. Now you're going to say we're going to take it off the tax rolls because we're just going to turn down any, you know...Apple Valley bring their concrete trucks down there because they have to come out that way. How are you going to handle that? If you close the road on the other end, you'll have to let them come out through the Hanus site there. Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 39 Gerhardt: I don't know. They discussed it today but there were alternatives. Brad Johnson: There's an easement there... Chmiel: You know your business better than I do, no question. How many other approaches had you made to other people for that particular site? Brad 3ohnson: 3 years. I've been on this for 3 years. This is the first, they're paying $5.00 a square foot for the land. That's the highest price anybody's paid for land. You know what that does? It doesn't make me a lot of money but it allows me to move around. Okay? Wildermuth: Must make Gary Brown pretty happy. Brad Johnson: No. Or you can leave it like it is. ! don't know if you realize what that really means because I know who will end up owning that, especially the Hanus building. Horn: I think if I heard Don right, he's saying he's not willing to really give more incentive to develop this site but he might be willing to wait for a few years to see what happens and take the chance of not having the increased tax base for 2 to 3 years. Is that pretty much it? Chmiel: Yeah. Brad 3ohnson: I don't know if it's 2 or 3 yeats. It might be a lifetime. Horn: I think there's going to be some increase because that Kurver property is going to develop. Kurver's property is going to develop. Brad Johnson: But like I said, it's going to develop in very marginal way. Horn: Yeah, but again it's a question of what our trade-offs are here and I think that's a risk that we'd have to be willing to take. Brad Johnson: The current ownership owns the road. We own the road. The City doesn't. Okay. They're on an easement so I can create at the current situation 72,000 square feet of developable property by owning the road and owning Kurver's and requesting a removal. If we leave it like it is, we'd only end up with 36,000 square feet there developable. Cutting in half what you potentially could put on the site. Those are all little subtleties in talking about taxes. I think you guys are missing an opportunity. Horn: I think that's a decision we have to make. I'd like to get from Tom your perspective. Rgain, the summary as I see it. Ne wait for something better to come along at the potential risk of something worse coming along. Provide increased incentive to get something of lower density or to try to work with this project are the options as I see them. Workman: I would prefer to keep control, whatever control we have in hand. I think very simply, and in very organized ways and none of this seems very Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 40 organized to me and so it's very difficult to feel comfortable with imagining myself using any of these facilities and always looking over my shoulder as I'm driving and where am I and what am I doing in going around and around and so I don't like it. It's not erad's fault. I think he's done a good job of trying to work with what he has. This slab here but I'd like to see something done. I'd like to see something done as soon as we can. I think anything that's going to be done is going to be an improvement to the site. Are we going to be able to gamble that with getting ultimately what we want in the future? I'm not so confident of that. Not that I don't mind waiting. I'm just not confident that waiting is going to be a payoff. ! think we'd have a very good chance of getting exactly what we could have now, at least and not anything really much better. At least within, if you're talking about a 5 year period. So in that sense it would be loss tax revenue. Horn: $o your vote is to try to work ~ith this? Workman: Yeah, I would say so. Hot n: J i m? Bohn: Not being able to guess the future. Horn: Where's your crystal ball Jim? Bohn: Don't know who owns it. Minister Life, I think they own the property now. Minister's Life? Brad Johnson: We have the rights to it. potentially. But we have to go back to them Bohn: They might tear it all down and put uP a nice big office building for a life insurance company. You never know. Brad Johnson: No, I know exactly where it will go. Chmiel: You tell us. Brad Johnson: use. It will become an intensified use of the current permitted Erhart: What do you mean intensified use of the permitted use? Brad Johnson: We've been trying to take out of there the Hanus type of uses. Okay? It would go back to more of the Hanus type uses. Erhart: Which is? Brad Johnson: Trucks. That's the permitted use. Truck maintenance facility. It's one of those little islands like Apple Valley concrete is. It's the only permitted t~uck maintenance facility on TH 5. Erhart: Is that permitted in that district? Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 41 Krauss: No. It's not permitted in the district but there was a conditional use. Brad Johnson: No, I said it'd just continue to be used as it's always been used. Krauss: I also have to say, I came into this and saw the site several times and felt that there probably are some violations or were some violations of the conditional use permit standards. It was pretty explicit as to how many trucks could be out there. How many of those trucks had to be able to run and on and on and on. Horn: What's our track record been in pursuing that? Krauss: Well I don't know. I haven't tried it yet. I mean because we're working with Brad and Brad was making some progress to clean it up anyway, let's see bow this plays out first. Horn: Think back to the records of Merle Volk. What's your vote Jim on those three options? Bohn: I'd like to keep control of that property. Horn: I have you down for a wait. Is that correct? Well my perspective is pretty much the same as Tom and Jim's. I'm not terribly excited about what I see here...but I just don't see t~ reality of that happening. $o I go along with Jim and Tom. I think we should try to work with this plan. I think we've got a lot of work to eR> on it and I'd like Paul and Todd to work really hard with tbs developer to make this the best quality thing we can but we have to understand too that they're in business. These people are in business you know and it's got to work for them economically. I don't understand those economics and I'm not sure the rest of you do but we have to make sure that our financial people do a careful analysis and keep them honest. What they say has to work really does work so I'd like to hear some financial evaluation on this thing. I'd like to hear a traffic thing that works and go for it and do the best we can with it. That'd be my recommendation. Are we looking for a vote on this? Chmiel: No. This is strictly information. Gerhardt: I think tonight's meeting was basically to update you on what tbs Planning Commission's action was on it and ! think Brad has taken all the information tonight and will continue to work with Paul in realigning the road and awaiting the traffic study. From that come up with another concept plan and bring it back to the HRA at that point. Brad Johnson: I can lower the intensity by moving the car wash. Horn: Ne understand that but we haven't heard anybody up here say that they're willing to give more financial incentive to this program. Brad 3ohnson: What I hear you saying is you might be opposed to a Hardee's and that doesn't make any sense to me at. all because that's a permitted use Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 42 there. I have problems with that. Chmiel: I think my real major objection is the flow of traffic numbers. If I can be convinced that it's not going to cause a problem within that specific area, then part of my concerns are gone. Horn: That's what I was getting at with Paul earlier. I think we need to hear some hard facts on this stuff. Let's find out how this density compares. Let's see how this traffic study works. We've got a lot of emotional reservations about this thing. Show us that the're purely emotional and the facts of the situation make it work. Brad 3ohnson: I guess we can come in and do the renderings once we kind of knew where we were. Right now you can see my problem. I think what they're looking for, we have the ability to take and start with the Apple Valley site and driving all the way along TH $ through the intersection and show you what this site would look like when it's done. Visually. Horn: Three of us up here have said we don't want to lose control. We don't want to give more incentive and we want to work with the project. Now Charlie isn't here but I guess you'll have to guess where he'd be on it. Anything else? Someone in the audience made a comment that could not be heard on the tape. Clayton Johnson: The reason you wouldn't want to is you're dealing with the existing problem of Hanus. I mean it's a redevelopment area. I mean if you don't like the Hanus building and where it sits and what it looks like, then this is a redevelopment area and as such it's deserving of more assistance. I mean it's not a rare piece of land out in the middle of the industrial park. Horn: I'd rather answer your question after the meeting. I think the HRA has done some of that in the past and we've received a lot of criticism for doing that and the public input has been the other way so it's more of a, at least our perception of what public input is when we do that sort of thing. Then I'll talk to you later more about that if you'd like. UPDATE ON APPLE VALLEY RED-E-MIX. Ashworth: Maybe I can just drop back a little bit in terms of saying, we have come to an agreement with Abby 8ongard. The City Council needs to approve that agreement but basically staff is supporting the agreement and it's, I would say close to our appraised value. That will allow for Abby's property, as you're aware is part of the realignment of TH lO1 and her house would be taken as a part of that project. I updated the Comm[ssion, or at least alerted the Commission at our last meeting regarding Apple Valley Red-E-Mix. Now that particular parcel was not proposed for taking as a part of the TH lO1 realignment project. The reason is that it does not, we're not physically touching that property with again the realignment project. Included in the budget for the realignment project however is the cost of putting in a relocated road, entry road for the Red-E-Mix. What Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 43 I've asked the engineer to look at is the cost associated with that because the only real alternative is to put an access in adjacent to Jerry Schienk's hbuse. Okay, and if you've walked in the back there, as that goes over the railroad tracks it's about 8-10 feet drop down to the railroad track itself. That means that you're going to be in the process of building some type of a bridge or something to take and get across that railroad track and that doesn't include the cost then back over to Jerry Schlenk who I'm sure would protest the taking. In other words, he would lock to probably a taking for the entire property. I don't think I would care to take and have Red-E-Mix trucks going adjacent to my home. You add all of that up and I think that the initial estimate of $150,000.00 for that access road is very low. Current estimates ~ould probably put that at $300,000.00. As Todd noted, we did ask the City Attorney for an opinion. This was in regards to number one, would we have to build that type of a road. Would that be a part of any type of settlement for this project? His response was yes. Next issue really gets into what happens if the City takes the Red-E-Mix property now versus waiting to some future date? We could take the property now because there is a current project. So simply by saying that we prefer not to put $300,000.00 into paying for an access road into a property and at the end of that period of time all you've done is spent $300,000.00 and the Red-E-Mix still stands, is it not more logical just simply to take out the Red-E-Mix and not worry about building an access road over to it. Basically the City Attorney agrees feeling that if we can work with Red-E-Mix and find some location for them, our cost exposure is going to be significantly less than if we either try to build the road, allowing them to stay or if we wait until some future point in time because if we wait until a future point in time, then you'd have to come up with some type of a new project which would justify tbs purpose of the taking itself. There was an issue as well as to an agreement that the City had entered into several years ago that would basically cause a cease of operations at the Red-E-Mix in 1992. That agreement I think is very questionable. Again, the City Attorney would feel much more comfortable if we again tried to work with Red-E-Mix in terms of finding them some other place. Coming up to agreement as to the amount of money to be paid. This again is solely, well first of all, I would like to take and get from the commission as to your feelings recognizing that the major cost associated with the Red-E-Mix, regardless of what choice is taken, will in all likelihood be paid out of that Hennepin County economic development district which is really under the authority of the Chanhassen City Council not the HRA. To the extent that that budget cannot fully support what I think might be the full expenditure including the expense associated with relocating Red-E-Mix, we may very well have to come back to the HRA and ask that the acquisition, including the relocation be jointly funded between the economic development district as a part of again, in lieu of road payments and the HRA for the actual purchase of the Red-E-Mix property. As we sit here tonight, I do not have the appraisal for Red-E-Mix so I cannot tell you what our likely exposure will be. I would anticipate that by our next meeting I would have that information available for you. Since the property is not really needed, with the Abby Bongard pro~>erty, we needed that property by end of year so that potentially if construction started as early as spring of 1991, that we would be in a position to get in, knock down Abby's house, clear the land and be able to turn it over to the State's contractor by spring. In the case of Red-E-Mix, we solely bays to Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 44 coordinate any type of road construction or at least their moving sometime before their access was taken out as a part of the realigned roadway. So we'll probably have until summer or fall of 1991 to make final decisions regarding Red-E-Mix. So this is something that you do not have to act on this evening. I've been trying to provide Just update reports as we've been going through this whole process. This is the third of those reports and I would guess that by our next meeting I would have an appraisal completed and at that point in time you'd be in a better position to weigh the options of do we want a road? Do we want to basically lose that money or should we kick in whatever extra amount necessary to actually take out Red-E-Mix? Did you have questions of me or feedback as it may currently exist. Am I heading in the right direction? Horn: I think so. I think ! for one expected that we might have those options this evening but I wouldn't, I have no questions if you don't have those options. Anybody else? Workman: We talked about where they would go. That's still difficult. Ashworth: That is a real tough issue. One of the potential ones would be, there's two lots left in the business park. They're both in that wooded area south of Prince's building. They have the advantage that it would be very difficult to see that property from almost anywhere. I'm sure that PMT would not be happy with that choice at all. We would have to look at the road systems as it exists for Park Drive and then the new road as it would head north because that would be their primary access. I don't think you could get directly onto Audubon. I have no idea what the Planning Commission's thoughts in that area might be. Other alternatives looked at included TH 212. We're going through the continuous debate with our friends, what is it the shooting range? Horn: Moon Valley. Ashworth: Yeah, Moon Valley. That has the advantage that the aggregate is right on the site you know. I would anticipate strong opposition by the residential group who has come before the City Council in regards to some dirt moving type of problems that have existed down in there. I'm sure their first issue would be we don't want any more trucks. We've been kind of, I don't want to say promised by the City that there wouldn't be more trucks but they would show the accidents that have occurred on TH 212 and that this would only compound the problem. The other problem is Apple Valley may not go there. Their trade area has been Chanhassen, Eden Prairie and coming up and down that hill may not be acceptable to them. Other than those locations, well there is the property by DataServ. I've been real relunctant to, and you could potentially put it far enough back on what would be new 184th Street so as to literally not see that operation from TH 5. It would have the benefit of being on new 184th Street. Direct access to TH 5. Signalized intersection. Easy access in literally all directions. The down side is that TH 212 will happen. TH 212 represents the closest, the closest connection a Chanhassen resident will have in terms of getting on or off TH 212 will be 184th Street. At that location you're literally only 4 to 5 blocks away from new TH 212. As 212 moves furthe west through the community, it continues'dropping further Housing and Redevelopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 45 and further south so that at TH 101 it's just north of Lyman and by the time it gest to CR 17, it's almost a half a mile south of Lyman. Horn: A thought occurs to me Don. You know, obviously we'd like to find a place to relocate them. This sounds like a zoning issue. We have a group that has spent an awful lot of time thinking about appropriate uses for certain things. Could we bring this up as a discussion item to the Planning Commission to give us a recommendation on that? You know they're a lot more familiar and have done a lot more thinking about what kind of things should go where than what we have. Ashworth: That's probably an excellent idea. Although we have been working with Paul, I'm not aware of any time that Paul has presented the issue back to the Planning Commission itself. Horn: Because we really need some help on this one. Ashworth: I'll do that. Horn: Anything else? APPROVAL OF JUNE AND JULY BILLS. Workman moved, Bohn seconded to approve the HEA bills for June and July, 1990 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Horn: Before we adjourn I wondered if we had any update on one of the HRA discussion items. We were going to have a discussion at the City Council level on our HRA consultants for downtown. Has that done anything? Gerhardt: Regarding the use of 8RW? Horn: That's correct. Gerhardt: No. Ashworth: I'm unaware of the issues. Gerhardt: At our last HRA meeting, I did forget that, and I think Tom and Don are receptive to that. We did not take the issue up with the Council. A good time to do that would have been last Monday. Time would have allowed but the HRA wanted to look at not using BRW for projects into the future. That we share the wealth with other engineering companies. Right now we have not entered into any new contracts with BRW. Don is, we've had discussions last week about that but again, ! don't know how you'd want to do that with Council. As a report item. Ashworth: Well the policy has been that the City Engineer is to agree to list 3 to 4 firms and this is by different type of engineering practices and then take from that list as projects come up during the course of the year. Take different firms off of that list in making his recommendation back to the Council as to which firm should be selected. What we've seen Housing and RedeveIopment Authority July 25, 1990 - Page 46 is that Gary has continued to feel that, BRW has a lot of the information associated with the downtown and that they actually represent the best firm to do Phase 2 if they've completed Phase 1. This same issue ! think came up as a part of the Council recently approved BRW as a part of County 17 upgrade and the issue was really one of why are we selecting BRW and Gary's response was, BRW did the initial report on that roadway. The initial feasibility study. The cost estimates. The work to be completed, etc. approximately 3 years ago. That project then sat on the shelf for a 3 year period of time while we're finalizing TH 5. Being able to move along through the community. When it came in to actually updating that project, updating that report and actually getting along with it, BRW was the most logical candidate. I think it's fair to say that the City Council desires to see the City not be as reliant on BRW as we have been and I think that it's simply a. matter of. Workman: Phasing them out? Ashworth: Well yeah. I think it's a matter of phasing them out but I also think that I need to provide clearer direction to the City Engineering to ensure that he is aware that both the HRA and City Council would like to reinstate the policy that had existed and I don't know how, I don't really think that we've deviated from it but I think that the engineers, and it's more than one because Bill Monk was involved with this process before Gary, have continued to select BRW or find reasons for why they should be continued. I guess what I'm saying is I will put that in the form of a memo from myself to Gary. I will then cc both the City Council and the HRA as a part of that and that should take care of it. Horn: Okay. Any other thing on that? One other thing I'd like to remind HRA that Rosemount is having an Open House on August let at 10:30. I believe we've all been invited to that and that's all I have. Gerhardt: I'd like to get a list of people who would like to attend that. You have to RSVP. Workman: I did. Gerhardt: I don't know if you did receive that. I mean I talked to Jeff $chmidt, had several conversations with him over the past 2 weeks and he had a. limited list to work off of. Jim, did you receive? 8chh: I received an invitation. Horn: I just saw it in the adminstrative section. Gerhardt: Did you receive one at home Clark? Horn: Not that I recall. Workman: It's a big fancy fold out picture of their building. Horn: I would have remembered that. Housing and RedeveIopment Authority 3uly 25, 1990 - Page 47 Gerhardt: I didn't get that. Workman: I'll sell it to you. How about the little blue building? I thought that was supposed to be down. Gerhardt: Little blue building update. Ne were successful in rel6cating Frontier Belle down into what is new revolution's, 3ohn Pryzmus and the Big A. They are going to be out of there at the end of the month. Southwest Music will also be out at the end of the month. The two locations that they're looking at is one of subleasing space from the Dinner Theatre and two, moving into Brad's old office once he moves into the Medical Arts. Chmiel moved, Bohn seconded to adjourn the meeting. ~1! voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting Has adjourned at lO=O0 p.m.. Submitted by Don Ashworth Executive Director Prepared by Nann Opheim