Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 07-12 CCM Joint Meeting with Opportunity SiteTask Force MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA JOINT MEETING WITH OPPORTUNITY SITE TASK FORCE JULY 12, 2006 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness and Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Kay Lasman, Mary O'Connor, and Diane Niesen. Also present were Interim City Manager Curt Boganey, and Deputy City Clerk Camille Worley. Opportunity Site Task Force members present: Muriel Lee, Jeanne Messersmith, Tim Willson, and Bud Sorenson. Interim City Manager Curt Boganey introduced Tom Whitlock, Damon Farber Associates. Tom Whitlock introduced a PowerPoint presentation and stated the objective for the meeting was to have a general discussion amongst the Task Force and the City Council for the two proposals received. He stated a consensus or preferred direction at the end of the meeting would be ideal. The presentation included the following information: a. EXPECTATIONS Mr. Whitlock discussed the expectations of the meeting which included: • Open Discussion regarding proposals submitted • Ground Rules • Consensus on which proposal is favored and is acceptable for further consideration by the Council • Council at a subsequent meeting will consider proposal, input received this evening and may direct staff to prepare development agreement with preferred developer b. SUBMITTALS Mr. Whitlock discussed the Submittals which included: Received ■ Real Estate Recycling ■ Steiner Development Why didn't more submit? ■ Too busy. ■ Negative influence of Brookdale Mall ■ Not sure City would look favorably on a 100% residential plan ■ Nearby glut of office space would drive prices down ■ Site better suited for light industrial uses ■ Development costs dictate housing prices between $200,0004250,000 a unit. Developer thought prices too high for market and too risky with minimal examples of success. c. OPTIONS BEFORE YOU • Accept • Reject • New proposal request • Recommend preferred proposal to Council for consideration of the preparation of a development agreement d. REVIEW OF PROPOSALS Mr. Whitlock discussed the following information: Review of Real Estate Recvclin2 Proposal Submittal details ■ Complies with submittal requirements ■ 99,700 SF office showroom project ■ 300 new jobs created ■ 2.3 acres — Structure ■ 4 acres — Paved area ■ 2.2 acres — Green space ■ Southern Building complete in October 2007 • Northern Building complete in August 2008 • Purchase Price = $1,100,000 • Taxable Value = $25,000,000 Proposal Deficiencies ■ Office /Showroom uses do not compliment neighborhood to the east ■ Project scale does not compliment pedestrian environment ■ Architecture does not relate well to neighborhood or street ■ Driveway on 57th does not align with Lilac Drive ■ No pedestrian linkages shown to north on Logan ■ No pedestrian connections shown within site ■ Landscape and fencing screen loading docks that face neighborhood ■ Primary access doors on Bldg 2 do not face the street. Proposal Benefits ■ Complies with Architectural requirements ■ Provides unique use that does not currently exist in the area ■ Accommodates power line easement ■ Building entries well defined with architectural character ■ Loading area screened from neighborhood with fencing and landscape ■ Responds to market ■ Proven tract record of success. 07/12/06 2 Review of Steiner Development Proposal Submittal details ■ Complies with submittal requirements ■ 36,850 sq ft of retail and 67 for sale housing units ■ 85 new jobs created ■ 1.6 acres — Structure ■ 3.6 acres — Paved area ■ 5 acres — Ponding ■ 2.75 acres — Green Space ■ Complete in Fall 2007 ■ Purchase Price = $1,845,000 ■ Taxable Value = $16,000,000 Review of Steiner Development Proposal Proposal Deficiencies ■ Commercial loading adjacent to neighborhood ■ Commercial orients towards highway and not neighborhood ■ Two driveways shown on 57th Avenue ■ Pedestrian connections now shown to the north or to the east ■ Limited pedestrian connections shown within site ■ Commercial ponds are not designed as amenities to the development Proposal Benefits ■ Mix of uses reflect neighborhood desire for smaller commercial ■ Inclusion of small grocery store ■ Accommodates power line easement ■ Housing entries well defined with architectural character ■ Housing compliments residential uses across Logan ■ Storm water pond at housing could become amenity ■ Loading area screened from neighborhood with fencing and landscape ■ Responds to market ■ Proven track record of success e. CITY COSTS Additional environmental assistance Mr. Boganey stated the City has engaged consultants who have been working with the MPCA, looking at the environmental conditions and working towards a definitive response from the MPCA as to what would be required from any development in order to receive a limited, no further action letter or an unlimited, no future action needed letter. L TASK FORCE /CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Task Force Member Bud Sorenson stated concern for the power line easement and the three story homes and the outdoor patios not being designed appropriately to be along Highway 100. He stated concern for the settlement issue caused by the dry cleaner property, practicality of the project, and snow removal. Mr. Whitlock responded the power line easement and setback respond to the voltage of the power line and the buildings are well within the State guidelines. Lisa Deal, Steiner Development, 07/12/06 3 responded that they attempted to set the homes back far enough to prevent interference with the power lines. Task Force Member Tim Willson stated the second driveway of the proposed development is too close to the intersection. Mr. Whitlock stated a list of concerns should be created for the developer to consider before presenting the plan to the City Council. Mr. Boganey stated the City would direct the staff to put together a development agreement that would involve negotiation. He stated the site plan will appear before the Planning Commission prior to submittal to the City Council. The Steiner Development Team stated the team is aware of the possible environmental issues and those issues will be researched. They addressed snow removal and stated it will be handled in the ponding areas. They addressed the patios and stated although unusual, the community likes to see people sitting outside. They discussed efforts made to ease the noise. They also addressed the second driveway and stated it was designed for easy access for the residents and fire department. Mayor Kragness inquired about the commercial buildings and their tenants. Ms. Deal stated the businesses would be neighborhood services such as tanning, hair, food, and a bank. Task Force Member Jeanne Messersmith stated objection to the Real Estate Recycling plan and stated many residents miss having a grocery store in the area. She stated concern with the light industrial use and truck traffic of the Real Estate Recycling plan. She stated concern for the children walking to school, pedestrian traffic and the plan not being complete until 2008. She stated concern for stormwater and the proposal for underground storage. She questioned the proposed 300 new jobs. She suggested that the City learn from the 49 Avenue North development and take note of its condition. She stated preference to the Steiner Development Proposal. Paul Hyde, Real Estate Recycling, explained how 300 jobs would be created with the proposal based on the amount of office space. He stated the truck traffic would be limited. He stated the 2008 completion date is the worst case scenario. He stated the new building on 49 Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard will be office /warehouse and has been 40% leased. Mr. Willson inquired about the office space market and existing buildings in Brooklyn Center. Mr. Hyde responded this is a new product and can not be compared to existing, vacant buildings in Brooklyn Center. Mr. Willson asked if core samples or spot samples were taken from the site. Ms. Messersmith inquired about the Pollution Control Agency (PCA) and soil conditions on the site. Mr. Hyde responded that the PCA was not contacted; however a similar situation was encountered on the 49 Avenue North project, leading to the environmental concerns. Mr. Boganey stated the City has a good idea of what is on the site; however he is unsure of the type or number of samples taken. 07/12/06 4 Mr. Whitlock stated phase II investigation of the soil is beginning. He stated he does not feel the site is highly contaminated. He stated removal of the soil is an option. He stated the soil was tested and a dry cleaning chemical was found and isolated to the dry cleaning site only. He stated more testing would take place this summer. He discussed the soil vapor monitoring by the PCA. Mayor Kragness stated residents want the beauty shop and grocery store uses back in the area. She stated she does not think the office use would fit on this side of Highway 100 and housing and retail is needed. Councilmember Niesen stated concern for the life of the area after 5:00 p.m. She stated favor of no housing along Highway 100. She inquired about maintenance of the property. Mr. Whitlock stated the City would not be responsible for maintenance; however it would be that of the developer, association, or MNDOT. Mr. Sorenson stated preference to the Real Estate Recycling plan because of the uses proposed. Councilmember Niesen discussed the difference between the amount each developer is purchasing the land for and the difference being almost one million dollars. She stated she feels the plan is simple and compared it to the complicated Maple Grove development. She stated concern for the money the City has invested in the property verses the amount it is selling it for. Councilmember Lasman had concerns about the concept of having similar projects on both sides of Highway 100 (Opportunity Site), and also stated concern about difficulties with recent legislation regarding redevelopment. The Council took comments from the public regarding the price of residential dwellings, and the residential construction type. A vote was taken. Real Estate Recycling Plan: Bud Sorenson. Steiner Development Plan: Muriel Lee, Jeanne Messersmith, and Tim Willson. Councilmember Niesen moved, Councilmember Lasman seconded a motion to authorize the administration to negotiate a development agreement with the Steiner Development for consideration by the Economic Development Authority. ' the O'Connor inquired about not selecting either proposal, selling th , and zoning it retail /residential. Mr. Boganey responded it is uncertain the type of proposal that would be submitted and if the land would be sold. Motion passed. Councilmember O'Connor abstained from voting on the item because she does not know if she wants to vote for development of the property. 07/12/06 5 g. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL WITH ADDITIONAL FOLLOW UP Councilmember Carmody stated support for Steiner Development and thanked both developers and residents for their input. Mr. Whitlock stated the next step is to compile information for staff preparation with the developer and to address concerns. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Lasman moved, Councilmember Niesen seconded a motion to adjourn the Joint City Council Meeting with the Opportunity Site Task Force at 8:43 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. City Clerk Mayor /Pres�ent 07/12/06 6