1979 10 25
.
e
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
October 25, 1979
Chanhassen City Hall
e
A regular meeting of the Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment was
called to order on October 25, 1979, at 7:30 p.m. The following
members were present: Commissioners Gullickson, Niemeyer, Przymus,
Whitehill. Also present were: City Manager, Don Ashworth and Jim
Burdick. Absent was Commissioner Bohn.
REVIEW DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS - JIM BURDICK: Mr. Burdick was present
to review three development proposals:
1). Professional Office Building: This would be approximately
the same size as the Roos Professional Building and would
be located on Mr. Burdick's property directly to the west
of the Burdick proposal.
2). Office/Warehouse Facility: This would be similar in
nature to the Hansen and Klingelhutz facility. It would
be located within Burdick Park and be directly east of
the Hansen and Klingelhutz facility.
3). Restaurant Facility: This development is proposed for
the intersection of Highway 5, County 17 and West 78th
Street.
e
The City Manager reviewed functions of the HRA in regards to development
proposals. Specifically, the city council has enacted a building
moratorium to allow the HRA to complete redevelopment plans within
the downtown area. Such moratorium would allow building to occur if
the applicant can demonstrate the proposed development would not detract
or in any other way limit the ability of the HRA to carry out
redevelopment activities. Specifically, the purpose of the moratorium
is to provide sufficient time for planning and redevelopment activities.
As this is a planning period, it is often difficult to state that the
city may construct a road in one manner or another, may rezone properties
to one use or another, etc. As such, it is the responsibility of
the applicant to demonstrate that his proposal would not have a
negative impact on the HRA's planning activities as a part of
redevelopment activities. The specific process under which a variance
is considered would be as follows:
1). The Housing and Redevelopment Authority would make
recommendations to both the Planning Commission and
City Council recommending that the variance to the
moratorium be approved or denied.
2). The Planning Commission similarly reviews the moratorium
request and recommends to the city council to approve
or deny the variance request.
e
3). After receiving recommendations from Planning Commission
and Housing and Redevelopment Authority, the City Council
approves or denies the variance request.
.
e
October 25, 1979
Page 2
e
The Commission generally discussed the three proposed land uses in
comparison to the land use plan prepared by BRW. The Manager noted
that, as a part of the redevelopment program, that a further definition
of the general plan would be required - one of the reasons the mora-
torium was established.
It was the general belief of commission members that the professional
building would not interfere with the HRA's ability to carry out
road construction or redevelopment activities. Further, that land use
controls could be established to insure that the office/warehouse
facility would not have a negative impact on land uses in this area.
Of primary concern is the fact that the restaurant facility has been
shown in an area originally designated as a green entrance area into
the community, that improvements to Highway 5 and County 17 have not
been established through the plan process, and that the HRA has not
specifically determined the feasibility and/or benefits of moving
West 78th Street to the north as shown in the concept plan.
e
After discussion, Commissioner Whitehill moved that the professional
building and office/warehouse facilities be found compatible with the
HRA's overall development plan. The proposed restaurant use is found
to be premature and should not be granted a variance. Further,
approval as to compatibility with development plans of the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority recognizes that the HRA has not reviewed
deta~led site plans, development contract restrictions concerning
use of building, outside storage, etc. and that such recommendations
to approve/deny this request are in regards to the building moratorium
variance only. If any or all of the proposed uses are granted a
variance to the moratorium, detailed site plans, contract restrictions,
etc. should be reviewed by the HRA prior to any final building approvals.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Przymus. Ayes - All.
PROGRESS REPORT, DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT: The City Manager
reviewed various progress items including correspondence in regards
to Super Valu, Kraus Anderson, Instant Web regarding to cooperative
work being completed by those firms. Additionally, the Manager
requested that interim monies be authorized for various work assignments
needed to be completed as a part of the redevelopment project. The
Manager noted a specific contract is being developed with BRW for
presentation at their next meeting.
Commissioner Niemeyer moved that the Manager be authorized to expend
up to $1,000 for professional services during the next 30 day period.
Seconded by Commissioner Whitehill. Ayes - All.
MINUTES: Commissioner Przymus moved acceptance of the minutes of
August 4, 1979.0 Commissioner Niemeyer seconded. Commissioners
Whitehill and Gullickson abstained. Motion carried.
e
Don Ashworth, City Manager