The URL can be used to link to this page

HRA 1985 05 307:30 p.m AGENDA CHANHASSEN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Thursday, May 30, 1985 Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive City Council Chambers 7:30 p.m. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 0 9. 9:30 P.M. 10. Call to Order Approval of Minutes Request for Special Assessment Reduction Agreement Park Court Plaza - Roman Roos, applicant Review Findings of Developer's Forum - Fred Hoisington Sale of the old Instant Web Building - Discussion a. Dorek and Baden Request b. Agreements with Gary Kirt Bloomberg Land Acquisition - Discussion Old Business New Business Approval of Bills Adjournment Minutes Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority Regular Meeting April 18, 1985 Call to Order _ vice- Chairman Horn called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. Present were Commissioners Horn, Robbins and Bohn. Chairman Whitehill and Commissioner Swenson were absent. Also present were City Manager Ashworth and City Planner Dacy. Approval of Minutes Bohn moved, seconded by Robbins to approve the minutes of the — April 4, 1985 meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Robbins moved, seconded by Bohn to approve the minutes of the March 21, 1985 meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Tax Increment Financing Plan Ashworth presented the Tax Increment Financing Plan and the effects of the incentive program on the tax increment district. The City Manager was directed by the HRA to update the plan as needed and analyze the effects of the request by Opus Corporation F (discussed next on the agenda). The HRA members felt that a negative cash situation in the district was not prudent. The HRA accepted the Tax Increment Financing Plan as presented. Special Assessment Reduction Program - Discussion of Opus Proposal Dacy presented the Opus request to the HRA. Opus Corporation has determined that lots in the northwest section of the business park cannot be utilized as originally platted due to very poor soil conditions. Opus is requesting that the Special Assessment Reduction percentage be increased to somewhere in the 10 to 128 range. Staff recommended a two tier schedule be established _ wherein the percent would remain at the 7% level if total assessments for a property were less than $30,000 per acre and would be 10 to 12% if the assessments exceeded $30,000 per acre. Bob Worthington from Opus Corporation stated that the soil correction process is labor intensive and very expensive to complete. He stated that the soil composition in these lots were such that they could not support a building over time. In replatting the lots, Worthington stated that additional street and utility improvements would have to be made. Robbins moved, seconded by Bohn to approve the general concept of the proposal but directed staff to update the tax increment financing plan and work out the details of this proposal and its impact on the tax increment plan. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Chanhassen HRA Minutes April 18, 1985 Page 2 New Business Robbins moved, seconded by Bohn to direct the city manager to obtain an insurance policy before closing on the sale of the Instant Web building to Dorek and Baden. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Ashworth requested authorization to expend $3,600 to remove tax liability on Bloomberg's parcels. This is necessary for the filing of the plat. Mr. Bloomberg will reimburse the city. Bohn moved, seconded by Robbins, to approve the expenditure of $3,600. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Approval of Bills Robbins moved, seconded by Bohn to approve the bills as pre- sented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Robbins moved, seconded by Bohn to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 P.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried. t:5i CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authorty FROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planne DATE: May 24, 1985 SUBJ: Special Assessment Reduction Agreement, Park Court Plaza, Roman Roos Attached for your review and approval is the proposed Assessment Agreement for the Park Court Plaza which is currently under construction by Roman Roos on Lot 3, Block 2 in the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. The project consists of a single story 15,000 square foot office /warehouse complex. Completion of the project is anticipated by September 1. A copy of the building plans will be available for your review at the meeting. The County Assessor has established a total minimum market value of $433,200 for this project. The vacant land value is presently set at $102,100. The HRA Special Assessment obligation for this project is calculated in the following manner: $433,200 - $102,100 = $331,100 x 78 = $23,177 The total current outstanding special assessments on the site is $47,135.17. These assessments are currently scheduled for repayment over the next 10 years at a 138 interest rate. RECOMMENDATION Adoption of Resolution No. 85 -1 approving the assessment agreement and authorizing its execution by the Chairman and Executive Director is recommended. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution No. 85 -1. 2. Project location map. 3. Copy of assessment agreement. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION Dated May 30, 1985 Resolution No. 85 -1 Motion By Seconded by RESOLUTION APPROVING ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT FOR CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS CENTER WHEREAS, Rome Properties, (the "Redeveloper "), owner of the following described real property: Lot 3, Block 2, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, Carver County, Minnesota, have tendered to this Authority a proposed assessment agreement, pursuant to Modification No. 5 to the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Plan, providing for the construction of certain improvements within the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project Area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, as follows: 1. The proposed Assessment Agreement is hereby approved as con- sistent with the Authority's Special Assessment Reduction Program. 2. The Chairman and Executive Director of the Authority are hereby directed and authorized to execute on behalf of the Authority said assessment agreement in the form attached hereto and made a part hereof, as Exhibit A. 3. The Chairman and Executive Director are hereby specifically authorized to make assessment reduction payments pursuant to said assessment agreement on the basis of the Minimum Market Value set forth in Section 3.3, and as computed in Section 3.2 of said agreement. 4. The amount of the assessment reduction payment under said assessment agreement is hereby determined to be $23,177.00 which amount is based upon the Authority's determination that outstanding levied eligible assessments total $47,135.17. Passed and adopted this 30th day of May, 1985 by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. ATTEST Executive Director Chairman YES: NO: ABSENT: 1 ' tof AT-1W n✓ m�rr of ,W4 (a< 14 sly rgA1 o(vay One o(5!o!e N1 we NN cams of NVe o(NE0 nE am �lcu..r l° pp°rj / rh s s described m Boot'Gy y n bne of ° of Se• µ , an o/ ; rs<ello,K,s � � oF�Sb(e NgSwy No 5 os lro.e.6/\ �rC�'cw,iy •— .rk lti�aifTe r — 5%{�/G � �' —I1 /r] - � y6 L ' _ //F is ^ -rK$n i.Y �i m•` s� ?PS B S iy z ul IL - a• , VSO 0Tj,0r �,r✓. �F ; k u: �+ r g ., I Y _iuN,ly eXxmi7 .. dpi J c «A •a•oa I: ,s«•o'r «r a „Zs ota rs«.. pU TL'..'•n« k A sf3 J mss" •y'o _ys n �Y° "i .m 8zi Em1y^uEo «ma,f ° z c V•�� x 'R Sfi ��OC`9 S y�ua9e •9g S R r,rwpO `.P �a " s,w�.m � w y- . "'. wy .;r�°,e°.d• 1 ;a22 /Yba a ° A�•�^� / S'z ''e;' I ^ «! 3 b i 8 '� 9• �• ap°✓ �•?� � p n n _„dtG x urc PF suy J•tir.� w s.J 6, P.°°s„ 65 f ° a 3 S o°?^d �vrj B •P? .`.d roq o� a �G✓ •.,ro8 `� �. ' *k ourtor`t VOli .xm .x <aiwa cs $ �2. v{ s/' "�'� °�� ae4� •��q� aJO i I >.' x,. o(,ruy o(S<u pi xx "�:��:,• N ", of SPA J Sec 14 —_._— __ — .o •aaA. I, 'P J J • � «•YN'C et MSC C N°°'a" 1 �� Xt, sso 8 I T- Z ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT CHANHASSEN HRA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REDUCTION PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT, made on or as of the 30th day of May , 1985, by and between The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Chanhassen, a public body corporate and politic (the "Agency "), established pursuant to Laws of Minnesota 1947, Chapter 487, as amended, being Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.411- 462.711 (the "Act "), and Rome Properties (the "Redeveloper "). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Agency was created pursuant to the Act and was authorized to transact business and exercise its powers by a resolution of the City Council of the City of Chanhassen (the "City ") ; and WHERAS, in furtherance of the objectives of the Act, the Agency has undertaken a program for the clearance and reconstruction or rehabilitation of blighted, deteriorated, deteriorating, vacant, unused, underused or inappropriately used areas of the City, and in this connection is engaged in carrying out a redevelopment project known as the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project (the "Project "), in an area (the "Project Area "), located in the City; and WHEREAS, as of the date of this Agreement there has been prepared and approved by the Agency and the City a redevelop- ment plan for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Agency requested the County of Carver (the "County ") to certify the current assessed value of the real pro- perty within the Project Area pursuant to Section 462.585 of the Act thereby establishing the Project as a tax increment financing district; and WHEREAS, the major objectives of the Redevelopment Plan are to: acquire for rehabilitation economically or functionally obsolete or underutilized buildings and land; provide a redevelop- ment site of character that will encourage future development of the area and improve sources of public revenue; eliminate blighting influences which impede potential development within the aforementioned redevelopment project; provide maximum oppor- tunity for redevelopment by private enterprise, consistent with the needs of the City as a whole; encourage private rehabilita- tion of structures within the redevelopment project; and WHEREAS, in order to achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan and particularly to make the land in the Project Area available for redevelopment by private enterprise for and in accordance with the uses specified in the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency has determined to provide substantial aid and assistance to the Project through the sale of bonds to finance the public costs of the redevelopment of the Project Area; and WHEREAS, the Agency believes that the redevelopment of a portion of the Project Area pursuant to this Agreement, and fulfillment generally of the Agreement, are in the vital and best interests of the City and the health, safety, morals, and welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable state and local laws and requirements under which the Project has been undertaken and is being assisted; and WHEREAS, the Agency has concluded agreements for the redevelopment of the various properties to be acquired in furtherance of the Project; and WHEREAS, said agreements provide recourse for the Agency should such redevelopment not be completed; and WHEREAS, Section 273.76 (Subd.8) of Minnesota Statutes empowers the Agency to enter into written assessment agreements with redevelopers of properties within the Project Area; and WHEREAS, it is contemplated that pursuant to this Agreement, the Redeveloper will construct certain minimum improve- ments upon the Redevelopment Property; and WHEREAS, the Agency, and the Redeveloper desire to establish a Minimum Market Value for the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum Improvements to be constructed thereon pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, §273.76, Subd. 8, and §462.445, Subd. 4 (1 and 16); and WHEREAS, the Agency and the Assessor have reviewed the Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements; and WHEREAS, the Assessor, acting pursuant to §273.76, Subd. 8 of Minnesota Statutes, has executed a Certification By Assessor as to the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum Improvements to be constructed thereon; and WHEREAS, the original copy of said Certification By Assessor, or a true and correct copy thereof is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit C and made a part hereof: -2- NOW THEREFORE, in considertion of the premises and the mutual obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: ARTICLE I. DEFINITIONS. Section 1.1 Definitions. In this Agreement, unless a dif- ferent meaning clearly appears from the context: "Act" means the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.411 et seq., as amended. "Agency" means the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Chanhassen. "Agreement" means this Agreement, as the same may be from time to time modified, amended, or supplemented. "Assessment Agreement" means any agreement substan- tially similar to this Agreement providing for payment by the Agency of eligible assessments from the tax increments received by the Agency in connection with the Project. "Assessment Reduction Payments" means payments made by the Authority to either the City or to the County's auditor, as a credit against eligible assessments, pursuant to Article IV of this Agreement or pursuant to agreements similar to this Agreement with other redevelopers of land in the Project Area. "Assessed Value" or "Assessed Valuation" means the value of real property as determined by the assessor in accor- dance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.13 (or as finally adjusted by any assessor, board of equalization, commissioner of revenue, or any court) against which the real property tax is imposed. "Assessor" means the Carver County Assessor or a City Assessor having the powers of the Carver County Assessor as to properties within the Project Area. "Bonds" means the general obligation bonds or obliga- tions issued by the City or the Agency to finance the costs of the Project including but not limited to the Assessment Reduction Payments made by the Authority pursuant to Modification No. 5 to the Plan. The term "Bonds" shall also include any general obliga- tion bonds or obligations issued to refund any Bonds. "Certification By Assessor" means the Assessor's cer- tification pursuant to Section 273.76, Subd. 8 of Minnesota Statutes, and Section 3.3 of this Agreement that he has reviewed the Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements and the -3- Market Value previously assigned to the Redevelopment Property, and that upon completion of said Minimum Improvements the market value assigned to the Redevelopment Property shall not be less than a specified dollar amount stated therein, and that the Market Value of the Redevelopment Property as of the date of execution of such certification is a specified dollar amount stated therein. "Certification of Occupancy" means the certification provided to the Redeveloper, or the purchaser of any part, par- - cel or unit of the Redevelopment Property, pursuant to Section 4.2 of this Agreement. "City" means the City of Chanhassen. "Construction Plans" means the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents on the construction work to be — performed by the Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property which (a) shall be at least as detailed as the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents which are submitted to the building inspector of the City, and (b) shall include at least — the following for each building: (1) site-plan; (2) foundation plan; (3) basement plan (if any); (4) floor plan for each floor; (5) cross sections of each (length and width); (6) elevations (all sides); (7) landscape plan. "County" means the County of Carver. "Date of Execution" means the date on which the Redeveloper signs this Agreement or the date on which the Agency signs this Agreement, whichever is later. "Eligible Assessments" means those special assessments (and those unlevied lateral unit charges and trunk unit charges) — which are more particularly described in Modification No. 5 to the Plan, and which have been imposed by the City on tracts of lands contained within the plats of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park and Park II in connection with either City of Chanhassen Improvement Project 78 -3 or in connection with any other City public improvement project which specially benefits said tracts of land within said plats. The term "Eligible Assessments" does — not include any building permit fees, any park charges owing to the City under applicable ordinances, or any availability or connection charges owing to the City pursuant to Section 444.075 of Minnesota Statutes or other applicable statutes or pursuant to appliable City Ordinances, or any sewer availability charges or similar charges imposed by the Metropolitan Council or Metropolitan Waste Control Commission or similar governmental unit. The term "Eligible Assessments" does not include any interest imposed by the City in connection with special assessments, unlevied lateral unit charges, or unlevied trunk — unit charges. "Event of Default" means an action by the Redeveloper listed in Article VI of this Agreement. -4- "Market Value" or "Market Valuation" means the esti- mated fair market value of real property as determined by the Assessor in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.11 (or as finally adjusted by any assessor, board of equalization, commissioner of revenue, or any court). "Maturity Date" means the date when the principal of, premium (if any), and interest on the Bonds are paid in full. "Minimum Improvements" are more particularly described made a part hereof. means those improvements which on Exhibit A attached hereto and "Minimum Market Value" means Market Value established pursuant to Section 3.3 of this Agreement. "Modification No. 5" means the fifth amendment to the Plan adopted by the Agency establishing a program of Assessment Reduction Payments and the resolution adopting the same. "Plan" means the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Plan as described in the "Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project Amended Plan, February, 1980, Revised March 20, 1980" booklet, as further amended from time to time by the Agency. "Project" means the Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project as described in the "Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project Amended Plan, February 1980, Revised March 20, 1980" booklet, as further amended from time to time by the Agency. "Project Area" means the real property located within the boundaries of the entire redevelopment district as described in Figure 1 contained in the "Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Project Amended Plan, February, 1980, Revised March 20, 1980" booklet. "Project 78 -3 Assessments" means the costs of City of Chanhassen Improvement Project 78 -3 which were specially assessed against benefited real property pursuant to Chapter 429 of Minnesota Statutes. "Real Estate Taxes" means ad valorem taxes on real pro- perty pursuant to Chapter 273 of Minnesota Statutes and not including any special assessments levied pursuant to Chapter 429 of Minnesota Statutes. "Redeveloper" means Rome Properties or its successors and assigns. "Redevelopment Property" means the real property which is more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof. "Redevelopment Plan" means the Plan. "State" means the State of Minnesota. -5- "Substantial Completion" means sufficiently complete, in accordance with the Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements, so that the Redeveloper (or his successors and assigns) may occupy the work for the use for which the Minimum Improvements are intended. If the Minimum Improvements are to be occupied by one or more tenants rather than the Redeveloper and no leases have been entered into with any tenants that would serve as the basis for constructing and installing interior improvements in the Minimum Improvements, then "Substantial Completion" shall mean that the structure, common building systems and utilities are substantially complete so that a Certificate of occupancy may be obtained by Redeveloper upon completion of the construction and installation of normal and customary interior improvements for the benefit of tenants occupying space in the Minimum Improvements. "Tax official" means any City or County assessor, county auditor, City, County or State board of equalization, the com- missioner of revenue of the State, or any state or federal district court, the tax court of the State, or the State Supreme Court. ARTICLE II. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES. Section 2.1 Representations by the Agency. The Agency makes the following representations as the basis for the undertaking on its part herein contained: r (a) The Agency is a housing and redevelopment authority duly organized and existing under the laws of the State. (b) The Project is a "redevelopment project" within the meaning of the Act and was created, adopted and approved in accordance with the terms of the Act. (c) The Project is a "tax increment district" created, adopted, certified and approved pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.585. (d) The Agency has established the Project Area as a "tax increment district" and has requested that the County audi- tor of the County certify the Assessed Valuation of all taxable real property in the Project Area pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.585. (e) The activities of the Agency are undertaken for the purpose of removing, preventing or reducing blight, blighting factors, or the causes of blight, and for the purposes of elimi- nating or preventing the development or spread of deteriorated or deteriorating areas. (f) To finance the cost of the activities to be under- taken by the Agency, the Agency proposes to use the proceeds of Bonds issued either by the City or the Agency and to pledge tax increment generated by the Project Area to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds. WE Section 2.2 Representations and Warranties by the Redeveloper. The Redeveloper represents and warrants that: (a) The Redeveloper is a partnership duly organized and in good standing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, is not in violation of any provisions of its articles of partnership, or the laws of the State of Minnesota, has power to enter into this Agreement and has duly authorized the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by proper partnership action. (b) The Redeveloper will construct the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the Plan and all local, state and federal laws and regulations (including, but not limited to, all known applicable environ- mental, zoning, building code and public health laws and regulations), as such laws and regulations are enacted and enforced during the period the Minimum Improvements are being constructed, and substantially in accordance with the Construction Plans which have been approved by the Agency. (c) The Minimum Improvements constitute a permitted use or authorized conditional use under the zoning ordinance of the City, a permitted use under the Plan and the Act. (d) That at such time or times as may be required by law, the Redeveloper will have complied with all known applicable local, state and federal environmental laws and regulations, will have obtained any and all know applicable environmental reviews, licenses or clearances as to the Redevelopment Property, and that Redeveloper has received no notice or communication from any local, state or federal official that the activities of the Redeveloper in the law or regulation (other than those notices or communications of which the Agency is aware). The Redeveloper is aware of no facts the existence of which would cause it to be in violation of any local, state or federal environmental law, regu- lation or review procedure or which would give any person a valid claim under state environmental rights statutes. (e) The Redeveloper will use all reasonable efforts to construct the Minimum Improvements in accordance with all existing local, state or federal energy- conservation laws or regulations. (f) The Redeveloper will obtain, in a timely manner, all required permits, licenses and approvals, and will meet, in a timely manner, all requirements of all local, state and federal laws and regulations which must be obtained or met before the Minimum Improvements may be lawfully constructed. (g) The real estate taxes and any installments of spe- cial assessments levied against the Redevelopment Property are not in default and that future real estate taxes will be paid when due. -7- ARTICLE _III. ASSESSMENT REDUCTION PAYMENTS. Section 3.1 Obligation of Agency to Make Assessment Reduction Payments. Upon completion of the Minimum Improvements and issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, the Agency, from the tax increment generated by the Project, shall make payments (in _ the manner and in the amount provided hereinafter) in reduction of the eligible assessments which have been imposed on the Redevelopment Property and which were unpaid upon the date of execution of this Agreement. The Agency, at its option, may satisfy its obligations to make assessment reduction payments under this Agreement by either making one lump sum payment or by making a series of semi- annual payments as individual installments of eligible assessments become due and owing to the City. In the event that the Agency elects to make said assessment reduction payments in the form of a series of semi - annual payments as individual installments of eligible, assessments become due and owing to the City, the Agency shall also pay the interest imposed thereon by the City; but only that portion of such interest which is attri- butable to that portion of any such installment which the Agency is obligated to pay under this Agreement. Any such payments of — interest shall not be a credit against the amount of any assessment reduction payment which the Agency is obligated to make under this Agreement. In the case of eligible assessments which have then already been certified to the County's auditor for collection with real estate taxes, said assessment reduction payments, together with any interest which the Agency is obligated to pay under this Section 3.1, shall be made directly to the County Auditor in full or partial satisfaction, as the case may be, of said eli- gible assessments. In the case of eligible assessments which have not then been certified to the County's auditor for collection with real estate taxes, said assessment reduction payments, together with any interest which the Agency is obligated to pay under this Section 3.1, shall be made to the City's treasurer in full or partial satisfaction, as the case may be, of said eligible assessments. In the case of eligible assessments which have been paid by the Redeveloper subsequent to the date of execution of this Agreement, said assessment reduction payments, together with any interest which the Agency is obligated to pay under this Section 3.1, shall be made directly to the Redeveloper or its designated successors and assigns. Section 3.2 Amount of Assessment Reduction Payment. The amount of any assessment reduction payment made pursuant to this Agreement shall be $ Twenty -three thousand one hundred seven seven and no /100 dollars ($23,177.00) which amount is computed as the lesser of the following amoc (a) the sum of the principal balance of the eligible assessments imposed on the Redevelopment Property, together with accrued interest thereon, both prin -. cipal and interest being computed as of the date of execution of this Agreement; or (b) seven percent (78) of the excess of the Minimum Market Value of the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum improvements constructed thereon as established pursuant to Section 3.3 of this Agreement over the Market Value of the Redevelopment Property as of the date of execution of the Certification By Assessor, and as certified in said certification. QID Section 3.3 Minimum Market Value to Be Used In Computing Real Estate Taxes. Upon completion of the Minimum Improvements by the Redeveloper, the Minimum Market Value which shall be assessed for the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum Improvements thereon shall be Four hundred =.thirty three thousand two hundred and no /100 -------------------- ------- --- ------- -- --- - - - - --( (Dollars) ($433.200.00 ) (hereinafter the Minimum Market Value). The Minimum Market Value established in this section shall be of no further force and effect and this Agreement shall terminate on the later of the two following dates: (a) the date on which the Bonds are retired, or (b) the date on which all assessment reduction payments due the Redeveloper (or his successors and assigns) pursuant to this Agreement have been made. In any event this Agreement shall terminate no later than November 28, 2007. Provided, however, that nothing in this Agreement shall limit the discretion of the Assessor to assign a market value to the Redevelopment Property in excess of the Minimum Market Value set forth in this section, nor prohibit the Redeveloper from seeking, through exercise of administrative, and legal remedies, a reduction in market value for property tax purposes; subject, however, to the restriction that the Redeveloper shall not seek any reduction in said market value below the Minimum Market Value, as set forth in this section, during the term of this Agreement regardless of actual market value which may result from incomplete construction of the Minimum Improvements, destruction or diminution by any cause, insured or uninsured, except in the case of acquisition or reacquisition of the Redevelopment Property by a public entity. Section 3.4 Termination of Entitlement to Payment. Notwithstanding any language in this Agreement to the contrary, the obligation of the Agency to make any assessment reduction payment to the Redeveloper (or its successors and assigns) shall become null and void on September 1 , 1985 , unless the Minimum Improvements are in a state of Substantial Completion (as defined in Section 1.1) on or before said date. Nevertheless, in the event Redeveloper is delayed in substantially completing the construction of the Minimum Improvements on or before the date specified herein by reason of labor disputes, casualties, acts of God or the public enemy, governmental embargo restrictions, short- ages of fuel, labor or building materials, action or non - action of public utilities or of local, state or federal governments affecting the work, or other causes beyond the reasonable control or fault of Redeveloper, then the date for substantial completion of the Minimum Improvements shall be extended for the additional time caused by such excused delay. Any such extension resulting from an excused delay shall not serve to extend the effective date of the Minimum Market Value or the real estate taxes levied with respect to the Minimum Market Value provided for in this Agreement. In the event the Minimum Improvements are not in a state of Substantial Completion on or before the date specified herein or such extension thereof as may result from an excused delay, and as a result thereof the Agency elects not to make any assessment reduction payment in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, then this Agreement shall cease and terminate without further obligation or liability on the part of the Agency or Redeveloper. ARTICLE IV. CONSTRUCTION OF MINIMUM IMPROVEMENTS Section 4.1 Construction of Minimum Improvements. The Redeveloper agrees that it will construct the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property and at all times prior to the Maturity Date will not cause a reduction in the real estate taxes paid in respect of the Redevelopment Property below the real estate taxes that would be assessed with respect to the Minimum Market Value through: (a) willful destruction of the Minimum Improvements or any part thereof; or _ (b) willful refusal to reconstruct the Minimum Improvements if the Minimum Improvements are damaged or destroyed. Section 4.2 Certificate of Occupancy (a) Promptly after completion of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement the Agency, upon the written application of the Redeveloper, will furnish the Redeveloper with an appropriate Certificate of Occupancy executed by the City's Building Official and by the Agency's Executive Director so certifying. Such certification by the Agency shall be a conclusive determination of satisfaction and termination of the agreements and convenants in this Agreement to construct the Minimum Ilnprovements. Such certification and such determination shall not constitute evidence of compliance with or satisfaction of any of the Redeveloper's obligations to any holder of a mortgage or to any insurer of a mortgage, securing money loaned to finance the Minimum Improvements, or any part thereof. (b) If the Agency shall refuse or fail to provide any certification in accordance with the provisions of this Section 4.2 of this Agreement, the Agency shall, within fifteen (15) days after written request by the Redeveloper, provide the Redeveloper with a written statement, indicating in adequate detail in what respects the Redeveloper has failed to complete the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, or is otherwise in default, and what measures or acts it will be necessary, in the opinion of the Agency, for the Redeveloper to take or perform in order to obtain such certification. -10- (c) The construction of the Minimum Improvements shall be deemed to be completed when such Minimum Improvements are in a state of Substantial Completion as defined in Section 1.1 of this Agreement. ARTICLE V. REAL ESTATE TAXES. Section 5.1 Real Estate Taxes. The Redeveloper agrees that, upon completion of the Minimum Improvements and prior to the ter- mination date stated in Section 3.3 of this Agreement, it will not cause a reduction in the Market Value of the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum Improvements below the amount of the Minimum Market Value and that it will not seek a reduction in the value of the Redevelopment Property and Minimum Improvements below the Minimum Market Value: T (1) By seeking administrative review or judicial review of the applicability of any tax statute determined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Project or the Redeveloper or raising the inapplicability of any such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings, including delinquent-tax proceedings; (2) by seeking administrative review or judicial review of the constitu- tionality of any tax statute determined by any Tax Official to be applicable to the Project or the Redeveloper or raising the unconstitutionality of any such tax statute as a defense in any proceedings, including delinquent tax proceedings; (3) by willful destruction of the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof; (4) by willful refusal to reconstruct damaged or destroyed property; (5) by requesting the Assessor to reduce the Market Value or Assessed Value of all or any portion of the Redevelopment Property; (6) by petitioning the board of equalization of the City or the board of equalization of the County to reduce the Market Value or Assessed Value of all or any portion of the Redevelopment Property; (7) by petitioning the board of equalization of the State or the commissioner of revenue of the State to reduce the Market Value or Assessed Value of all or any portion of the Redevelopment Property; (8) by maintaining an action in the District Court of.the State or the Tax Court of the State pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 278, seeking a reduction in the Market Value or Assessed Value of the Redevelopment Property; (9) by applying to the commissioner of revenue of the State requesting an abatement of real property taxes pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 270; and (10) by maintaining any other proceedings, whether administrative, legal or equitable, with any administrative body within the City, the County, or the State or with any court of the State or the federal government. The Redeveloper shall not, prior to the Maturity Date, apply for a deferral of property tax on the Redevelopment Property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.86. -11- Nothing in this Agreement shall limit the discretion of the Assessor to assign to the Redevelopment Property a Market Value to the Redevelopment Property in excess of the Minimum Market Value established pursuant to Article V of this Agreement. However, the Redeveloper is free to contest said Market Value to the extent that it exceeds the Minimum Market Value established in Section 3.3 of this Agreement. ARTICLE VI EVENTS OF DEFAULT. Section 6.1 Events of Default Defined. The following shall be "Events of Default" under this Agreement and the term "Event of Default" shall mean, whenever it is used in this Agreement (unless the context otherwise provides), any one or more of the following events (and the term "default" shall mean any event which would with the passage of time or giving of notice, or both, be an "Event of Default" hereunder): (a) Failure of Redeveloper to pay when due any real estate -taxes on the Redevelopment Property; (b) Failure of the Redeveloper to complete the Minimum Improvements on or before the date stated in Section 3.4 of this Agreement. (c) Failure by the Redeveloper to observe and perform any covenant, condition, obligation or on its part to be observed or performed hereunder, within thirty (30) days after written notice to the Redeveloper specifying such failure and requesting that it be remedied (or within such other period as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement); or if the failure is by its nature incurable within such thirty (30) days, failure by the Redeveloper to furnish to the Agency satisfac- tory assurances that the Redeveloper can and will cure such failure or failures within reasonable time. (d) If the Redeveloper shall admit in writing its ina- bility to pay its debts generally as they become due, or shall file a petition in bankruptcy or shall make an assignment for the benefit of its creditors, or shall consent to the appointment of a receiver of itself or of the whole or any substan- tial part of the Redevelopment Property. (e) If the Redeveloper shall file a petition or answer seeking reorganization or arrangement under the federal bankruptcy laws. -12- (f) If the Redeveloper, on a petition in bankruptcy filed against it, be adjudicated a bankrupt, or a court of competent jurisdiction shall enter an order or decree appointing, without the consent of the Redeveloper, a receiver of the Redeveloper or of the whole or substantially all of its property, or approve a petition filed against the Redeveloper seeking reorganization or arrangement of the Redeveloper under the federal bankruptcy laws, and such adjudication, order or decree shall not be vacated or set aside or stayed within sixty (60) days from the date of entry thereof. Section 6.2 Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default referred to in Section 6.1 of this Agreement occurs, the Agency may make any one or more of the following actions: (a) Cancel and rescind this Agreement. (b) Withhold the Certificate of Occupancy. (c) Cancel any pending Assessment Reduction Payments due under the terms of this Agreement, causing a forfeiture of such payments in favor of the Agency. (d) Take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or desirable to the Agency to collect from the Redeveloper full reimbursement for any I Assessment Reduction Payments previously made pur- suant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding the prior provisions of this Section 6.2, it is agreed that the Agency shall not be entitled to withhold a Certificate of Occupancy in the event that the Agency elects to cancel and rescind this Agreement under clause (a), or Redeveloper reimburses Agency for any Assessment Reduction Payments made by Agency prior to the occurrence of such Event of Default, together with any reasonable expenses incurred by Agency in enforcing the provisions of this Agreement, or Redeveloper cures any Event of Default to the satisfaction of Agency and the parties are restored to their former positions under the provisions of this Agreement. Section 6.3 No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to the Agency is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies, but each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statutes. No delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing upon any default shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from time to time and as often as may be deemed expedient. In order to entitle the Agency to exercise any remedy reserved to it, it shall not be necessary to give notice. -13- Section 6.4 No Additional Waiver Imp the event any agreement contained in th breached by either party and thereafter party, such waiver shall be limited to waived and shall not be deemed to waive vious or subsequent breach hereunder. ARTICLE VII. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS. lied by One Waiver. In is Agreement should be waived by the other the particular breach so any other concurrent, pre- Section 7.1 Conflict of Interest; Agency Representatives Not Individually Liable. No member, official or employee of the Agency shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in the Agreement, nor shall any such member, official, or employee participate in any decision relating to this Agreement which affects his personal interests or the interests of any cor- poration, partnership, or association in which he is, directly or indirectly interested. No member, official, or employee of the Agency shall be personally liable to the Redeveloper or any suc- cessor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the Agency or for any Assessment Reduction Payments which may become due under the terms of this Agreement. Section 7.2 Duty of Agency to Act Reasonably. Wherever this Agreement requires the Agency to approve any action of the Redeveloper, it is understood and agreed that the Agency will not unreasonably withhold or delay such approval. Section 7.3 Titles of Articles and Sections. Any titles of the several parts, Articles, and Sections or this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disre- garded in construing or interpreting any of its provisions. Section 7.4 Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication under this Agreement by either party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally and (a) in the case of the Redeveloper, is addressed to or delivered personally to the Redeveloper at 10341 Heidi Lane Chaska, Minnesota 55318 (b) in the case of the Agency is addressed to or delivered personally to the Agency at Chanhassen City Hall or at such other address with respect to either such party as that party may, from time to time, designate in writing and forward to the other as provided in this Section. -14- Section 7.5 Counterparts. This Agreement is executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. Section 7.6 Covenants Running With Land. The recording or filing of this Agreement with the County Recorder or County Registrar of Titles shall constitute notice of this Agreement to any subsequent purchaser or encumbrancer of the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, whether voluntary or involuntary, and shall be binding upon them. The Redeveloper agrees to supply the applicable owner's duplicate certificate of title, if any, so as to permit the recording of a copy of this Agreement in the office of the Carver County Recorder. It is intended and agreed that the covenants and agreements set forth in Article V of this agreement shall be covenants running with the land and that they shall, in any event, and without regard to technical classifica- tion or designation, legal or otherwise, be binding to the fullest extent permitted by law and equity, for the benefit and — in favor of, and enforceable by the Agency, its successors and assigns. In the event that any transferee or assignee of the Redeveloper (including without limitation any mortgagee taking possession of or title to the Redevelopment Property as a result of any default in the terms of any mortgage to which the Redevelopment Property is now subject or may be subject in the future) breaches any one of the covenants and agreements set forth in said Article V, the Agency may treat such breach as an Event of Default as provided in Article VI of this agreement and may exercise any one or more of the remedies set forth in Section 6.2 of this agreement. Section 7.7 Limitation of Liability. The Redeveloper and its successors in fee title ownership of the Redevelopment Property shall be responsible for performing and observing the covenants and agreements set forth in this Agreement only during the time that the Redeveloper or a successor is the fee title owner of the Redevelopment Property. In the event fee title to the Redevelopment Property is conveyed to a successor in interest, the grantee shall be automatically responsible for performing and observing the covenants and agreements herein contained and then the grantor shall be automatically freed and relieved from and after the date of such conveyance of all obligation and liability in connection with the performance and observance of such cove- - nants and agreements. Section 7.8 Discharge from Land Records. The Agency agrees promptly upon request by Redeveloper or its successors and assigns, after the expiration or termination of this Agreement and the satisfaction of the covenants and agreements contained herein required to be performed by Redeveloper, to execute a termina- tion agreement or other similar document in recordable form that shall serve to release and discharge the provisions of the Agreement as a lien or encumbrance of the Redevelopment Property from the records of the office of the Registrar of Titles of Carver County, Minnesota. -15- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Agency has, caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf and its seal to be hereunto duly affixed, and the Redeveloper has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf and its cor- porate seal to be hereunto duly affixed, on or as of the date first above written. (Seal) THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN 10 Its Chairman And Its Executive Director Rome Properties Red to er By: By oman oos Its President -16- _ STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 19_, by Don Ashworth , and Clifford L. W ite i , the Executive Director , and CH-airman of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. Notary Public County: My Commission Expires: _ STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19_p by Roman Roos , , of Rome Properties , a Minnesota Corporation, on behalf of the corporation Notary Public County: My Commission Expires: -17- EXHIBIT A xMWxxMxO cx 15,100 "Minimum Improvements" means a i671ID square foot multi- tenant office /warehouse building constructed of concrete block and masonry. l l I II r EXHIBIT B "SPECIMEN ONLY" 3 2 Lot V X&� Block 6, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the Registrar of Titles, in and for Carver County, Minnesota. CERTIFICATION BY ASSESSOR Tax Parcel No. AS- /7 O 0 / Street Address / c Park Placo. MN h' 31 i The undersigned having reviewed the Construction Plans for the Minimum Improvements and the Market Value assigned to the Redevelopment Property upon which the Minimum Improvements are to be constructed pursuant to the attached assessment agreement, and being of the opinion that a "Minimum Market Value" set forth in this Certification appears reasonable, hereby certifies as follows: The undersigned Assessor, being legally responsible for the assessment of the Redevelopment Property (more particularly described in Exhibit B to the attached assessment agreement) hereby certifies that the market value assigned to such land (the Redevelopment Property) and improvements (the minimum Improvements) upon completion of cpnstruction hureon shall be not less than Foyr L- �tinr�t "C17- 1,rIy%(1f- eeTho�Sata� Two (7 Jired� Dollars )'until termination of the attached assessme t agreement. The undersigned further certifies that the market value of the Redevelopment Property as o the date of n execution of this certification 1S [= n� Hv„�hE .L,.,vO /Gouso re7 -Cn¢: �tJna r<� Dollar! For the purposes of this certification, the words used herein have the definitions utilized in the attached Assessment Agreement. Assessor e the City of Chanhassen STATE OF MINNESOTA) Ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of - 19�: by the Assessor for the City of Channass n. _L at� A/ '2i Notary Public County: My Commission Expires: F DEBORAH L. BERGSTROM NOTARY PUBLIC • MINNESOTA CARVER COUNTY ' My Comm:s Exom"1$ 19a H CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planne DATE: May 24, 1985 SUBJ: Findings of the Developer's Forum Fred Hoisington will make an oral presentation of the findings of the recent Developer's Forum. Attached for your review is the summary of the written responses to the questionnaires distri- buted at the forum. CHANHASSEN DEVELOPERS FORUM SUMMARY - May 9, 1985 Question 1. What are your general impressions of the Plan? Generally speaking the response was very favorable. Specific comments were as follows: a. More attainable. b. Upgrading of Hwy 5 is essential. c. Downtown needs advertising. d. Need to encourage residential and industry. e. Need to avoid bringing in too much too soon. f. Can't build something that won't sell. g. Vacant land is better than vacant buildings. h. Need people. i. Need housing. j. Need development south of Hwy 5 to support downtown. k. "Very good." 1. "Looks much more realistic than original plan." M. "I'm impressed - attainable." n. "Excellen.t." o. "Concept is right. Needs definition and market study." Question 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment of downtown? Why or why not? It was generally agreed that a new access to Hwy 5 is very important. Specific comments were as follows: a. b. c. d. e. f. 9. h. "Perhaps not imperative, but very important." "I think three accesses to Hwy 5 could work as we have now with right hand slip lanes to west." "Very important especially a right in and right out." "Go for it." Access is extremely important on the Consider a bridge over the tracks on Should go for second access now. Markets are regional, area population drive through and employment. going home side. high ground. (present and future), i. "Very vital - (a ring road - done right)." j. "Yes - an the west - close 78th - 101 on the east to trade for ring route." Question 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be mcst attractive to the development community? For what uses? Though not conclusive, there seemed to be agreement that the north side of West 78th Street needed to be addressed first. Comments included: a. It is imperative to clean up the north side of West 78th Street because it is detrimental to downtown— even if the City builds a gazebo it would be helpful. b. Housing should be considered on the north side. c. Housing requires an attracative amenity; maybe the proposed park would serve that purpose. Would be especially good for senior citizens housing. d. "The vacant land." e.. "Upgrade north side of town." f. Low cost attractive housing for actors is needed. g. "Both sides of Hwy 5 first — High visibility and traffic. Fast food, service stations, bank, etc." h. "Hotel — Commercial — Elderly housing — housing in general — We need Hwy 5 upgraded." Question 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establishment of a theme? No real conclusion was reached. Comments included: a. Need a theme and western theme is okay. — b. Need to be a destination other than just for the dinner theater. c. Theming is good but it shouldn't be too cutsie. d. Need to think in terms of an upgraded Hwy 5. e. No — but why not. f. "Bringing housing development to the south of Hwy 5. We need people so that developers of commercial will take a look." g. "Incentive to upgrade existing buildings, to first class status." h. "More people in the 1 -3 -5 mile radius — absolutely! Well done western theme — fine." i. "Encourage a development advisory group — i.e. Plymouth. Encourage residential. Chanhassen is a good place to live." Question 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment partnership? a. Reputation of inviting people in, a reputation the City has not had. b. "IR Bonds - tax increment." C. "Get a plan and stick with it - build the streets." d. "Making it easier for developers to do the things that are economically feasible to them and good for the community." e. "Money." f. "Circular traffic pattern to Hwy 5, etc." g. Jobs and people. h. City has to focus on one single -most important "doable deal ". Need brick and mortar results. i. Need to invite and pick a developer - shouldn't deal with more than one developer. j. HRA is going to have to move some businesses out. k. The City can't continue to have a negative reputation. 1. Need a.pro- development mission statement that highlights Chanhassen as a great place to live. M. "Low interest development money - reduction of no growth element and the guts to stand up to them." n. A commitment of IRBs and TIF to downtown developers but not to competitive developers on Hwy 5. o. "Financial support. $ investment in improvements. Create a good residential climate - rental and for - sale." Question 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanhassen? The response to this question was limited. Comments included: a. Good apartment sites. b. Housing only. C. "An effort to improve Colonial Shopping Center." d. "I have and always will be very interested in encouraging developers to our City." e. "I am absolutely up to my ears trying to bring 450 -500 families to Lake Susan Area plus 60 acres of either expanded industrial or residential. This is my part." f. "Yes - overall concept - development of senior housing." r • � � DOWNTOWN CHANHASSEN — REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PHASE II - FINAL REPORT CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 PROCESS 1 OBJECTIVES 2 CONCEPT PLAN HIGHLIGHTS 2 IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE 4 APPENDIX - Forum 2 Agenda - Forum 2 Discussion Guide - Developer List — - Developer Forum Agenda - Developer Questionnaire - Developer Forum Summary — - Individual Developer Responses Brauer & Associates, LTD. May 30, 1985 r INTRODUCTION This is the third of three planning reports that have been prepared as part of the Downtown Chanhassen Redevelopment Program. This report represents the culmination of Phase II, the purpose of which was to prepare a Concept Plan that could be supported by both the local community and the marketplace. The following is a summary description of the process, the Concept Plan and a suggested implementation timeline. PROCESS Phase II consisted of the following: 1. The compiling of a base map including the expansion of the study area to include properties along West 79th Street. 2. The collection, mapping and analysis of data including meetings and discussions with MnDOT and railroad personnel. 3. Meetings with City Staff and with prospective developers to assess market realities. 4. The preparation of two preliminary concept plan alternatives. 5. The review of alternative concept plans with the HRA on February 21, 1985. 6. The conduct of Forum 2 on March 14, 1985 to present the plans to business people and citizens and to select a preferred concept. Concept 2 was unanimously supported by Forum 2 participants. 7. Presentation of the preferred Concept Plan to the HRA for review, refinement and approval on March 21, 1985. 8. Refinement of the preferred Concept Plan. 9. The compilation of a list of potential developers, builders and brokers to be invited to the Developers Forum (list attached). 10. Presentation of the refined Concept Plan to developers at a dinner meeting on May 9, 1985. 11. Refinement of the Concept Plan. 12. Presentation of the final Concept Plan and Report to the HRA on May 30, 1985 and a discussion of future courses of action. OBJECTIVES Based on the Forums 1 (Phase 1) and 2 input, the Consultant formulated the Concept Plan alternatives around the following objectives: 1. To retain the mainstreet concept. 2. To retain businesses appropriate to downtown and eliminate businesses which are not downtown use types. 3. To provide for incremental or staged projects. 4. To create a pedestrian environment with appropriate linkages to the community. 5. To capitalize on Dinner Theater traffic including the provision for entertainment, specialty retail, office and lodging facilities. 6. To provide convenience shopping to satisfy the needs of residents. 7. To provide joint parking to maximize parking efficiency. 8. To unify the downtown with architecture, landscaping, signage and public spaces. 9. To consider housing as a downtown use. 10. To improve access (visual, vehicular and pedestrian) to downtown. 11. To improve downtown's compatibility with adjoining residential areas. 12. To attempt to develop a festival environment that focuses on the artisan community. CONCEPT PLAN HIGHLIGHTS Two alternative Concept Plans were prepared as part of the process. Concept 1 relies heavily on the present street system and includes no additional access to State Trunk Highway 5. This Plan represents a less than desirable fallback position in the event the additional Highway 5 access embodied in Concept 2 is not achievable. 2 Concept 2 is the preferred alternative in that it provides another high visibility access to downtown from Highway 5. This additional access must be considered, however, in light of all of the existing accesses to Highway 5. Among other things, Concept 2 provides for the following: 1. . The extension of West 78th Street or mainstreet southerly to Highway 5. 2. A connection of West 79th Street to the new Highway 5 access creating an expanded ring road concept which interconnects the areas north and south of the railroad tracks. 3. Redevelopment of the north side of West 78th Street while retaining the Colonial Shopping Center and the Riviera Restaurant. 4. The continuation of limited on- street parking. 5. Retention, expansion and integration of the businesses on the southwest corner of Great Plains Boulevard and West 78th Street. 6. Expansion of the Chanhassen Dinner Theatre entertainment and specialty retail complex. 7. Creation of a downtown public square or commons area. 8. Establishment of joint parking and an internal and external walkway system to help establish downtown as a multiple purpose destination. 9. Establishment of a landscaped buffer between the CBD and the Chan View neighborhood. 10. The connection of Coulter Drive to West 78th Street to provide the First Bank of Chanhassen and City Hall with an identifiable entrance. 11. Relocation of the historic City Hall building. 12. Relocation of Great Plains Boulevard to facilitate access to downtown. 13. The unification of downtown by the establishment of landscaping, entry features, appropriate signage and compatible architecture. 9 IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE 1. Adopt Concept Plan Summer 1985 2. Initiate Street, Drainage, Sanitary Sewer ' Feasibility Study (West End) Summer 1985 3. Planning For Broadened Study Area a. Land Use b. Streets c. Utilities d. General Feasibility e. Priorities Summer 1985 ^ 4. Developer /Project Selection /Agreements Fall 1985 5. Project Feasibility Study (Site Specific) a. Improvement Costs b. Appraisals c. Relocation Costs d. Financing Alternatives Fall 1985 6. Update TIF, Relocation & Redevelopment Plans, Determine Grant Availability Fall 1985 7. Prepare Grant Applications (If Available) Winter 1985/86 8. Begin Negotiations With MnDOT and RR Winter 1985/86 9. Design Framework Plan (Commons, Lighting, Walks, Streets, Arch, Landscaping, Signage) 1986 10. Commence Project 1 Construction The priority /timing of the following projects depends on developer selection progress, grant application /local financing capabilities, and costs as established in completing 1 -10 above. Acquire, Clear Project & Commons Lands /Relocate Businesses Vacate /Reconstruct Great Plains Blvd. /Relocate Old City Hall Acquire Land For West 78th Street Extension, Drainage & Instant Web Parking Construct Storm & Sanitary Improvements Replat West 79th Street Construct West 78th Street Extension to Instant Web Construct New RR Crossing & Connection to Hwy 5 2 I 1 i 1 I I I 1 1 11 I I I I 1 I I 1 1 March 14, 1985 AGENDA CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PUBLIC FORUM 2 7:00 pm Sign In /Draw A Plan for Downtown Chanhassen 7 :20 Introductions /Meeting Purpose /Where From Here 7 :25 Presentation of Forum 1 Results 7:35 Presentation of Alternative Plans 8:00 Questions 8:15 Small Group Discussions 8:45 Reports from Small Groups 9:30 Adjourn Each table should select a reporter. It will be the reporter's responsibility to record the findings of the small group and to report to the large group. EASE BE SURE TO TURN IN YOUR WRITTEN SMALL G March 14, 1985 DISCUSSION GUIDE TABLE # Chanhassen Downtown Redevelopment Program Public Forum 2 1. Which of the two plan alternatives does your group most nearly support? Alternative #1 Alternative #2 Why? 2. What modifications would your group suggest be incorporated with your preferred alternative? 3. What other factors do you feel still need to be considered by the Consultant prior to development of the final plan? 4. Other comments - Use the back of this page if necessary. DEVELOPER LIST Brad Johnson Home Financial Center 6600 France Ave. So. Suite 620 Edina, MN 55435 Mark Z. Jones II Highland Properties, Inc. 5290 Villa Way Edina, MN 55436 ` Tom Ryan Ryan Development Co. P. 0. Box 598 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 Bruce A. Peterson Security Development Company, Inc. 7545 Office Ridge Circle Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Kirt Woodhouse Trammell Crow Company 8300 Norman Center Drive r Suite 270 Minneapolis, MN 55437 Herb Bloomberg Bloomberg Companies, Inc. i Steve Dorn Red Owl 215 Excelsior Ave. Hopkins, MN 55343 Herb Mason Hagen & Mason Investment 33 Tenth Av. A. Hopkins, MN 55343 Mike Higgins State Bank of Chanhassen Jim Curry Jim Curry Investment Co. 4817 Upper Terrace Edina, MN 55435 Harry Pauly, Pauly's Dave Shultz, Dolphin Construction Denny Spalla and Lloyd Inglsma, Kraus - Anderson Bob Mason Mason Homes — Al and Tom Klingelhutz Gary Kirt Jack Henning Bob Worthington Opus Corporation 9900 E. Bren Road — Minnetonka, MN 55345 William Naegele 4300 Baker Road Minnetonka, MN 55343 Marvin Hartman - Victoria Ron Clark Construction — Terry R. Smith, Boisclair Corp. Rod Hardy Frank Beddor Ed Dunn Bruce Knutson Knutson Construction Company 17 Washington Av. N. Minneapolis, MN 55401 r- AGENDA CHANHASSEN DEVELOPERS FORUM THURSDAY, MAY 9, 1985 Garden Room - Chanhassen Dinner Theatre 6:00 p.m. Cocktails 6:45 Dinner 7:30 Introductions - Mayor Tom Hamilton Housing and Redevelopment Authority - Clark Horn Redevelopment Background and Planning History - Don Ashworth, City Manager 7:55 Presentation of Concept Plan 8:20 Developer Feedback and Questionnaires 9:00 Adjournment CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAY 9, 1985 1. What are your general impressions of the plan? 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment of downtown? Why or why not? 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to the development community? For what uses? 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establishment of a theme? 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment partnership? 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanhassen? NAME COMPANY ADDRESS PHONE We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. -_ CHANHASSEN DEVELOPERS FORUM SUMMARY - May 9, 1985 Question 1. What are your general impressions of the Plan? — Generally speaking the response was very favorable. Specific comments were as follows: a. More attainable. b. Upgrading of Hwy 5 is essential. c. Downtown needs advertising. d. Need to encourage residential and industry. e. Need to avoid bringing in too much too soon. f. Can't build something that won't sell. g. Vacant land is better than vacant buildings. _ h. Need people. i. Need housing. j. Need development south of Hwy 5 to support downtown. k. "Very good." - 1. "Looks much more realistic than original plan." M. "I'm impressed - attainable." n. "Excellent." o. "Concept is right. Needs definition and market study." Question 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment of downtown? Why or why not? It was generally agreed that a new access to Hwy 5 is very important.. Specific comments were as follows: a. "Perhaps not imperative, but very important." b. "I think three accesses to Hwy 5 could work as we.have now with right hand slip lanes to west." C. "Very important especially a right in and right out." — d. "Go for it." e. Access is extremely important on the going home side. f. Consider a bridge over the tracks on high ground. g. Should go for second access now. h. Markets are regional, area population (present and future), drive through and employment. i. "Very vital - (a ring road - done right)." j. "Yes - on the west - close 78th - 101 on the east to trade for ring route." estion 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to the development community? For what uses? Though not conclusive, there seemed to be agreement that the north side of West 78th Street needed to be addressed first. Comments included: a. It is imperative to clean up the north side of West 78th Street because it is detrimental to downtown - even if the City builds a gazebo it would be helpful. b. Housing should be considered on the north side. c. Housing requires an attracative amenity; maybe the proposed park would serve that purpose. Would be especially good _. for senior citizens housing. d. "The vacant land." e. "Upgrade north side of town." f. Low cost attractive housing for actors is needed. g. "Both sides of Hwy 5 first - High visibility and traffic. Fast food, service stations, bank, etc." h. "Hotel - Commercial - Elderly housing - housing in general We need Hwy 5 upgraded." Question 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establishment of a theme? No real conclusion was reached. Comments included: a. Need a theme and western theme is okay. b. Need to be a destination other than just for the dinner theater. c. Theming is good but it shouldn't be too cutsie. d. Need to think in terms of an upgraded Hwy 5. e. No - but why not. f. "Bringing housing development to the south of Hwy 5. We need people so that developers of commercial will take a look." g. "Incentive to upgrade existing buildings, to first class status." h. "More people in the 1 -3 -5 mile radius - absolutely! Well done western theme - fine." i. "Encourage a development advisory group - i.e. Plymouth. Encourage residential. Chanhassen is a good place to live." — Question 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment partnership? a. Reputation of inviting people in, a reputation the City has not had. b. "IR Bonds - tax increment." C. "Get a plan and stick with it - build the streets." d. "Making it easier for developers to do the things that - are economically feasible to them and good for the community." e. "Money." f. "Circular traffic pattern to Hwy 5, etc." g. Jobs and people. h. City has to focus on one single -most important "doable deal ". Need brick and mortar results. i. Need to invite and pick a developer - shouldn't deal with more than one developer. j. HRA is going to have to move some businesses out. k. The City can't continue to have a negative reputation. 1. Need a pro - development mission statement that highlights Chanhassen as a great place to live. M. "Low interest development money - reduction of no growth element and the guts to stand up to them." n. A commitment of IRBs and TIF to downtown developers but not to competitive developers on Hwy 5. o. "Financial support. $ investment in improvements. Create a good residential climate - rental and for - sale." Question 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue j in downtown Chanhassen? I The response to this question was limited. Comments included: a. Good apartment sites. b. Housing only. r C. "An effort to improve Colonial Shopping Center." d. "I have and always will be very interested in encouraging developers to our City." e. "I am absolutely up to my ears trying to bring 450 -500 families to Lake Susan Area plus 60 acres of either expanded industrial or residential. This is my part." f. "Yes - overall concept - development of senior housing." (Revised May 15, 1985) CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAY 9, 1985 1. What are your general impressions of the plan? R �.� rt1[DiWMe ;JT AO ST U `I' �ttv��.Q � EY�t�►avfiU - rbAlre. w> T" sod'A- -Ia3 1FS1�4.1JP lfffr, O IU 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment of downtown? Why or why not? `%9 AoT C Xv ilkv� AUE1,9 0p� M14 "t`['_:;- �X15�Tto TWa °°" �►��(/��` Ctt)2. �Ft��T /pctG�aS t3 t' �tlA�fhiN�S� could & V4t,te1j0 -"Je POWWOW -Ott /? D�P�c�terl Po� Jtz►a�(1�' 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to the development community? For what u es? Awl �vOW(050T murT' -(IL:' 1#01; � cowrtlmoo 714 a 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establish- ment of a theme? 0eAA1DU *W A "5MAA.-� r6oljcr Au'y {r,,45101� f(k&4 E � filivi- (►Ak) t3a h-c�ri►tr<1,� Btu'' LJOM4(4) rift. 10inAepIA19 FJT UAC-. 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment partnership? 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue {{ V in downtown Chanhassen? t� rIONOMP 105 pu,C' Cl' A4A vow Tp pry. 6U�1!0) Its CAM �r71AP51404F moa-�t: of 04 � &t�r� ot~ 0,ac.t�' P-tGlta-r NAME: OtVAA) 04-07"`2 COMPANY: n n 1 �% ADDRESS: 10,0 7Mi+W_ �r J t A6C N P-, PHONE: _/ q q � //Z We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. C.G. —( lIsj P. VMJ O.A. d d'ali . CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAY 9, 1985 1. What are your general impressions of the plan? m- ,rV4^.1 1lw.Q ra .of t o ."� �vc� JT r(t. _ . •S , Qti#r'k.- 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment of downtown? Why or why not? (C- - 1 r 4Fad PJR' SEhJ�r, r,0 '��fr -'C - %'C_rg%[. e_ DJ ht��rhl- !'caC.� �►1 +F�6W 4411+0. •%!- lT, QJ,•a.-rtS•etS -R.JRa pb ACCP --" 130 1aFr4 s 4.e. l .iCPT A.rT - 8 GQt <a ^^N_ GS�Q �aE ' 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to F-VO the development community? For what uses ?� 1)� gyp. * -a .� a J.. ��.n PE4 Ft rl,��c - + @te�hJ dp �tlD- tR?n)F1 sO Iw1 . �+ A l�{7 • 1]O S IF,C- JJ."ZA]ITv,.P"r- iC( If1(• W' ak6nec. rt,.r.rn.,� -- t4�-s•P -v4 RTM.E ...1.�•r��.��.r.t. - 4k•,aG4ta�, •- Ne��,.n r�rn-aP -tt.. Il:�t.!_r.? 1'.'t taS ^ ��4�tt. vdlR,stT .�.: ti P�'h'T'►Rn4w_T101< h'ti.^Mi ��. �L (�7Ly+tiJS 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do cdoor you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establish - a)s 81- ment of a theme? t,+ xr,�J -�. �tr 4_ Y' ►r��o -r-,-v*N -4tt _%Ae W,9-A 0K.. i fL F 4i - t+eM.rrti r�n+yorr� -ra d.� b Ot��^^�c. ' '^7 '�'ra w� aka.. -+H wr. .q_, . 'FKK�E+�• a 4 � 1 y Gam— JC T too CtV 'TO -"k to K. k 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment partnership? Qt�PJrhTttil ' k1Trt�L 7Ptx cM .1 .Je0L.w � tNt -er %] Gra. >c. --•a CO cN4J_- - V4N4.ce. rtt+er� 1��f�bstrrldr- 4"*C ---" Wooe_ P,�.tz - t ._ �Enr . *9etk-r- aa1c,< ^( V,4r_ TACT . =r -ri?rw dk o*4F. 60�V . .=Wo1 -1-h A q'1C_K_ 0/ ,�,F*ae s •.tom � - .,..,.1 ca,-+ a - .., -�f., a.ov • c�... L;"-c41 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment i ,1544 effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanhassen? A- EaA✓T- 4Nw� NEGfesta�G t- *o.�'v^�ro►1— @A+y*�l i- ►�+� ^ve�-fe- �-l�ze. Wt�o,J, 28 e-•t Cho. 0-ca . 1(0 I&l Ct1a 4AAD NAME: COMPANY: ADDRESS: PHONE: �t-t} — ►.�tJ� -r-M� -ntJ . �crtveoar. -� O0100ctt_ —,tit Wtius . We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. —%�r.a � - �-t'*a r,9�r� e- ltasroJ �sl+r*�t.•M..b�— v- lrs,�raJ � C��tA+.Fa+r�zer� -� laC�,�iD>_ 16 U �. AJEbp 4401.%21.3 46 Z. AI-A-- ezv q V +r-*6 4 a seVsS4..0 3. AL. Xc..sc rs . MVL)A P 4--ew-44- iso 40..0. Nmd;> �••J. Se eG 'l • -%66. %. *Sl 0,J "AY t ♦�c� N+&c 8..qswqL� CAA.>c — CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAY 9, 1985 1. What are your general impressions of the plan? QvJ 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment ofi� owntown? �y o lhy nc�t? v` t+�l� iS ©\ \ \nn C\.�S %vt 1 \VJ \s 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to the development community? For what uses? 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establish- ment of a theme? N o �� \V� ,,qU \, 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment partnership? 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanha sen? NAME: COMPANY: ADDRESS:_ -- PHONE : 9, We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. ^ CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAY 9, 1985 1. what are your /j general impressions of the plan? T i eG 2. Do you think d new A cess to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment of downtown? Why or why not? J 7 : L �ruCa ` � ..fit -«•� J !!'rC..- Cru.� -� . � �'f >, L�UZy7� (t/..!- C,C1C.' .,/�•- %l%' -fl-C� ?'IC�.[Cl" l�.�i��,�4e�i�t�af',,Ci .�.0 " /••'�i 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to _ the development community? For what uses? GU'e9 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment _ffort will require the establish- ment of a theme? 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment partnership? .f.Lc•I't, 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanhassen? NAME: COMPA ADDRE PHONE: We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAy 9, 1985 A 1. What are your general impressions of the plan? n� 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment o downtown? Why or y -441 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to the development community? For what uses? 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establish- ment of a theme? ' _ V v4 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment partnership. 1�I�� '''� �w� .s- c.'-lc •�'t�'�/�fiv c�,yf ��r,��if- �c Cr-f >��'(� 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanhassen? '^ �. ,�P� tkivyf CW'GL•CS�� _,�Q•G�UT�ti6(6 'fJ��iy^ (VLF' �I�' "�. NAME: COMPA ADDRE PHONE: 1� / ) 7 " I9 /l — e � `3 P - 6CGo We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. C CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAY 9, 1985 1. What are your general impressions of the plan? 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment of downtown? Why or why not? 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to the development community? For what uses? 7 r 7 _ — �' e. ,G*�` What might the catalyst for downtow redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establish- ment of a theme? 1 I r 5. ha will the City have bring fb<- a /red development ✓ 4�r^�� partnership? 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanhassen? NAME: 1A OBI_ E� ✓` - COMPANY: ADDRESS: PHONE: We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. l l CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAY 9, 1965 1. What are your general impressions of the plan? _ f 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the r redevelopment of downtown? Why or why not? 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to the development community? For what uses? 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establish- ment of a theme? 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment parttnn�ership ?�%%�I� � 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanhassen? NAME: COMPANY: ADDRESS: PHONE: We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAY 9, 1985 1. What are your general impressions of the plan? 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the redevelopment of downtown? Why or why not? 3. What areas (sites) do you feel would be most attractive to the development community? For what uses? if 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establish- f ment of a theme? WLPAX 5. What will the City have to bring to the redevelopment pa�pprtnershxip? _ � /� ^!�✓\ 6. Would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanhassen? Cwy, /moo y sa - soa -o-►► t 4A-t J- , aAX,", 6 0 aAAAt, NAME: �1 COMPANY: IADDRES PHONE: 1 We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. 10 11 Y19" 141 U1FA a, CITY OF CHANHASSEN May 19, 1985 F FrC.F'V—rj Tom Hamilton MAY 151985 Clifford Whitehill City of Chanhassen nommUNITY DEVELOVidENT DEP 690 Coulter St. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gentlemen: Thank you very much for your fine hospitality Thursday night. Gene Holderness and I enjoyed Lite opportunity to hear from both sides concerning the future and development of downtown Chanhassen. Enclosed with this letter is the Developer Questionnaire which I carried out with me. In summary here is what I heard: 1. HWY 5 needs to be upgraded as soon as possible. 2. Downtown development cannot be forced but must meet market demands. 3. Development should focus on both community and commercial needs, plus the opportunity of a special- ized commercial hotel facili.ty tied into the traffic generated by the Dinner 'Theater. 9. Chanhassen has to create a political enviornment en- couraging housing both for sale and rental. 5. The community as a whole must join together to sell. Chanhanssen on a place to live. Ultimately this will 7 increase property values and stablize taxes. 6. Consider forming a Development Advisory Board. our firm would be interested in working with the city to provide Commercial, Rental Housing and Senior Housing elements of the plan. - Please let me know where we can go from here. S' cerely, / )3fadle Johnson BCJ /j* i cc: �Ba�rb Dacy Products supplied byWifillaril�s rt�.t�Tr(7age Corporation r- ArviN E�fle s e� LLENDEH 6600 France AvenueSouth, Surtc 620 - Edina, DIN5 5435 (612) 927 -6617 Each office mdeoendenfk owned and overaled. CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER QUESTIONNAIRE MAY 9, 1985 1. What are our genera( impressions of the plan? 2. Do you think a new access to STH 5 is imperative to the \ redevelopment of d ntown? Why or why not? - P - 10 1 5 00 ��4 e- 3. What areas (sites) do you feel woul be most attracti the deveIlopment commu_njjty? 'F hat1 uses? ti c c� VJ V-P I l.Qylj 4. What might the catalyst for downtown redevelopment be? Do you feel the redevelopment effort will require the establ' h- ment of a theme? ri I V to ,.q ell nmteS to e 7 -A'.4 ctl"40I C41a� — -If 5. What will the City have to bring to tie redeve- uppmmefft - partnership? 094, ��5',.�(u�]��'��,e�� „� q- *- c vj j�.4.t..�c. —A' c�.A��.w- .'�lC•�1rI IJU.Y�"C^� ( 6. would you be interested in participating in the redevelopment d� �` effort? What type of project might you be willing to pursue in downtown Chanhassen? NAME: T4 . t o a� s COMPANY: _ W) � I 1 AYYY� L-�7Y\a P-tr ADDRESS: / 00 NCO PHONE: 6IZ - We thank you for being with us and for your contribution to our redevelopment program. Security Development Company, Inc. S] K)PPING CEN -FE11 I)EVELOPEI3S May 13, 1985 Mr. Fred Hoisington 10334 Balsam Lane Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 RE: DOWNTOWN CHANHASSEN Dear Fred: First of all, let me thank you for the excellent dinner that you invited me to partake in last Thursday evening. Scott Col.umb of _ our office and I enjoyed the meal at which time we visited with three (3) very enjoyable personalities. One was a city council person by the name of Carol, a planning commission member by the name of Ladd and the third was a Mr. Prenevost of the David C. Bell Company. Since the initial letter that you sent out suggested ajournment _ of the meeting at 9:30, I felt free to make a 10:00 commitment. I apologize that it was therefore necessary to leave at 9:30 promptly at which time you had just commenced to dicuss question #3 of the six (6) questions. With regard to question #1, I felt that your plan was quite good. The only comment that I was about to make just before Herb Bloomberg spoke was to question whether or not the grades permitted an intelligent access to the State Highway 5 in the southwest corner of your development plan. Regarding question 2, I don't believe that new access to Highway _ 5 is absolutely imperative (it is desirable however) if you are successful at doing a better job of moving the traffic through the intersection of 78th Street and Highway #101 (the corner where the two (2) churches are) which I believe your plan does in fact accomplish. Concerning question #3, the sites that would be most attractive for retailing would be the Chanhassen Dinner Theatre (south) side of the street functioning as a continuation of the retailing and entertainment concept that Herb Bloomberg has begun. With regard to question #4, I would submit that the Chanhassen Dinner Theatre is, as you say a regional anchor or a regional type draw and therefore additional shops and hotel facilities should be connected to the dinner theatre and a western theme that Herb Bloomberg has begun should be capitalized on. 7545 (NfiCC 111(19c CiniC 11whic. hlinlicsola 55344 • (GI?) 941 -066U . Fred Hoisington May 13, 1985 Page 2 Regarding question #5, I feel the city should provide tax increment funds for the development and further, it should construct parking lots and /or ramps and provide generous free parking at no original capital cost or operating cost to the developer or developers. Fred, regarding question #6, you are aware that we at Security Development Company like you, are in a public service business and the mission of our company is to function as a developing agent in behalf of well capitalized project owners. Should there be a developer such as Herb Bloomberg, Tom Ryan or the like who would like to invest in such a project and have the need for professional developers such as Security Development to provide the retail contacts, financial relationships and overal I specialized retail expertise to function as the business and l marketing representatives for the investors, we would be ` interested in discussing a working relationship, provided that we r felt the concept that the developers /investors desired to pursue was financially feasible and marketable. We are currently doing exactly that for: The downtown enclosed mall, hotel, office project under development in downtown Rochester, Minnesota. The Toledo World Trade Center which will comprise two j (2) levels of retailing, hotel and office. The Fitger Brewery in Duluth, Minnesota, where construction is complete and leasing is nearing completion (hotel, retail, office) as well as numerous other retail and mixed -use developments. Thank you once again for your interest in Security Development. Sincerely, Bruce A. Peterson President BAP /ln CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY in 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA SS317 (612) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planner DATE: May 24, 1985 SUBJ: Sale of the old Instant Web Building The city closed on the sale of the bowling center portion of the Instant Web building on May 10, 1985. Demolition of this portion is now in progress. As directed by the HRA at the last meeting, the insurance policy has also been received. Dorek and Baden have requested additional space from the city portion of the building for additional seating area for the meeting /banquet area. Staff will be receiving the details of this request next week, and will present those at the meeting. A final meeting has been set for May 24 (the same day as the agenda mailing) to meet with Gary Rirt to discuss final details of the sale agreement. Staff will update the HRA on Thursday evening regarding the outcome of Friday's meeting. CHANHASSEN HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Iml 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planner DATE: May 24, 1985 SUBJ: Bloomberg Land Acquisition The Community Development Block Grant Environmental Assessment comment period expired May 17, 1985. Dan Wilson has arranged for the appraisal to be completed by May 29th in anticipation of City Council action on June 3. The Council at the June 3rd meeting will review the appraisal and determine if it is "fair and just compensation" as required by HUD regulations. The review appraisal will be completed by June 10th and the city hopes to consummate the transaction with Mr. Bloomberg by mid -June.